[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Page 14128]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              PEER-REVIEW PROSTATE CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM

  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Department 
of Defense, DOD, Peer-Review Prostate Cancer Research Program.
  No one in this Chamber has been spared the tragedy of cancer taking 
the life of a family member or friend. Many of those lives, in fact, 
have been taken by prostate cancer, as it is the leading cause of 
cancer deaths in men. Because baby boomers are entering the risk age 
for prostate cancer at a rate of one every seven seconds, the 2 million 
men currently impacted by the disease are increasing at about every 8 
percent per year. Still, lives can be saved and finding a cure can be 
accelerated.
  The DOD Peer Review Prostate Cancer Research Program continues to 
prove to be a success and many new treatments to end the pain and 
suffering due to prostate cancer are on the horizon. That is why I 
support a $100 million earmark for fiscal year 2005.
  The return on this investment is well worth it. In recent years, the 
DOD Breast Cancer Program funded groundbreaking research, such as the 
discovery of the drug Herceptin, which prolongs the lives of women 
afflicted with a particularly aggressive type of advanced breast 
cancer. In fact, Herceptin when used appropriately with chemotherapy 
increases the chances of survival by about 33 percent.
  Those breakthroughs are possible in prostate cancer. This disease 
needs a Herceptin-like drug, and it is possible with adequate and fair 
funding for the DOD Peer Review Prostate Cancer Research Program.
  This one-of-a-kind research program uses an innovative granting 
structure that brings scientists and consumers together to make key 
policy decisions about prostate cancer research. Since its inception 
eight years ago, this far-reaching, influential program has literally 
changed the way prostate cancer research is done. It has become a model 
that other research programs have sought to replicate.
  The program has funded two key research grants, the Prostate Cancer 
Consortium Awards, which could help us unravel prostate cancer's 
challenge. These grants cover a 3-year period and are designed to 
produce an intervention--drug, device or procedure--to bring us all 
closer to finding a cure for this devastating disease.
  This program is not only a shining example of streamlining effective 
research; it is an outstanding model for best business practices. Every 
penny spent by this program is accounted for at a public meeting every 
2 years. Ninety percent of the funds go directly to research. This kind 
of efficiency and prudence in spending is unheard of in some of our 
Nation's best businesses and charities let alone other federally funded 
research programs and agencies.
  According to reports of this business conscious program, the DOD Peer 
Review Prostate Cancer Research Program cannot conduct human clinical 
trials without the earmark funding of $100 million for fiscal year 
2005. The program must help treat men, not just mice.
  Unfortunately, the language in the Senate Department of Defense 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005 threatens both the funding and 
unique structure of the Prostate Cancer Peer Review Research Program. 
The Senate bill combines all of the congressionally directed cancer 
research programs into one account and reduces the total funding 
available to all.
  Because the Senate version lumps all the cancer programs into one 
pot, rather than maintaining separate earmarks, the proposal will have 
multiple, negative outcomes. As written, the Senate bill dismantles the 
unique accountability over research and seriously threatens the 
consumer-scientist driven integrity of the DOD prostate cancer research 
program. The proposal relieves the government of accountability while 
forcing cancer groups to compete with one another for reduced funding. 
And, a particularly dangerous component of the proposal transfers 
funding to other cancer projects that are not recommended by a 
scientific peer reviewed process
  As the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005 
goes to conference, I urge my colleagues to support the language passed 
in the House and preserve this critical program for prostate cancer 
research.

                          ____________________