DIET, DNA METHYLATION AND OTHER EPIGENETIC EVENTS, AND CANCER PREVENTION: 
COMPETING SUPPLEMENTS

RELEASE DATE:  September 27, 2002

PA NUMBER: PAR-02-175

EXPIRATION DATE:  This Program Announcement expires on March 19, 2004, unless 
reissued. 

National Cancer Institute (NCI)  
 (http://www.nci.nih.gov/)
The Office of Dietary Supplements (ODS) 
 (http://www.nih.gov/icd/od)

LETTER OF INTENT RECEIPT DATE:  February 18, 2003
APPLICATION RECEIPT DATE:  March 18, 2003

THIS PA CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION

o Purpose of the PA
o Research Objectives
o Mechanism of Support 
o Eligible Institutions
o Individuals Eligible to Become Principal Investigators
o Where to Send Inquiries
o Letter of Intent
o Submitting an Application
o Peer Review Process
o Review Criteria
o Award Criteria
o Required Federal Citations

PURPOSE OF THIS PA

The NCI and the ODS invite competitive supplement grant applications for 
existing NCI grants to undertake adjunct research projects leading to 
elucidation of mechanism(s) by which dietary factors influence epigenetic 
processes as well as increasing the understanding of these processes in 
cancer prevention. The approach is to encourage collaboration between 
nutrition and epigenetic /DNA methylation experts to study bioactive food 
components with cancer preventative properties, and to examine key epigenetic 
events in cancer processes (i.e., carcinogen metabolism, cell division, 
differentiation, apoptosis) so that investigators can begin to establish 
linkages between epigenetics, methylation pattern, and tumor 
incidence/behavior. It is anticipated that the information gained will 
provide guidance for the development of dietary intervention strategies for 
cancer prevention.

In addition to the present announcement, the NCI and the ODS announce a 
related initiative about diet, DNA methylation and other epigenetic events, 
and cancer prevention utilizing an additional funding mechanism: research 
project grant (R01) and exploratory/developmental grant (R21) award 
mechanisms (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/Guide/rfa-files/RFA-CA-03-016.html) 
to encourage studies related to the impact of diet and nutrition on 
epigenetic events. Contact individuals listed under "INQUIRIES" of this PA 
for further information.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Background

Cancer is a manifestation of both abnormal genetic and epigenetic events.  The 
importance of epigenetic events is that it represents a mechanism by which gene 
function is selectively activated or inactivated.  Actually DNA methylation is the 
covalent addition of a methyl group to the 5 position of cytosine within CpG 
dinucleotides and is a fundamental process that not only modulates gene expression, 
but is also key to regulating chromosomal stability.  A variety of regulatory 
proteins including DNA methyltransferases, methyl-CpG binding proteins, histone-
modifying enzymes, chromatin remodeling factors, and their multimolecular complexes 
are involved in the overall epigenetic process.  Since epigenetic events are 
susceptible to change they represent excellent targets to explain how environmental 
factors, including diet, may modify cancer risk and tumor behavior.  Abnormal DNA 
methylation patterns are a hallmark of most cancers, including those of high 
proportion in the United States i.e., colon, lung, prostate, and breast cancer.  

Preclinical and clinical studies provide intriguing evidence that part of the 
anticancer properties attributed to several bioactive food components, 
encompassing both essential and non-essential nutrients, may relate to DNA 
methylation patterns.  There are four ways in which nutrients may be 
interrelated with DNA methylation.  The first is that nutrients may influence 
the supply of methyl groups for the formation of S-adenosylmethionine (SAM).  
The second mechanism is that nutrients may modify utilization of methyl 
groups by processes including shifts in DNA methyltransferase activity.  A 
third plausible mechanism may relate to DNA demethylation activity.  Finally, 
the DNA methylation patterns may influence the response to a nutrient. These 
interactions are described in greater detail below.

Global DNA Methylation Patterns

Global hypomethylation, accompanied by region-specific hypermethylation, is a 
common characteristic among tumor cells.  Global genomic hypomethylation has 
been linked to the induction of chromosomal instability.  Hypermethylation is 
associated with the inactivation of virtually all pathways involved with the 
cancer process, including DNA repair (e.g., hMLH1, BRCA1, MGMT), cell cycle 
regulation (e.g., p16(INK4a), PTEN), inflammatory/stress response (e.g., COX-
2) and apoptosis (e.g., DAPK, APAF-1).  Thus, evidence exists that variations 
in the degree or site of DNA methylation can lead to abnormal DNA repair and 
influence multiple cancer related genes and thereby influence the incidence 
and behavior of tumors.

Stress including that resulting from dietary methionine/choline, folate, 
zinc, and selenium inadequacy, as well as excessive alcohol intake can lead 
to global DNA hypomethylation.  Interestingly, the continuous feeding of a 
diet deficient in choline and methionine is recognized to lead to global DNA 
hypomethylation and cause hepatocellular carcinomas in rats in the absence of 
any exogenous carcinogen.  Paradoxically, either deficient or excess dietary 
arsenic has also been shown to lead to global hypomethylation in rat liver.  
Treatment with excess retinoic acid can also lead to hypomethylation as 
recently shown in rat liver.  Clinically, global DNA hypomethylation has been 
observed in lymphocytic DNA from individuals consuming inadequate folate.  
While limitations in the supply of methyl groups appear to be a common 
mechanism, available data suggest that other factors determining DNA 
methylation, including DNA methyltransferase (Dnmt), may be influenced by 
bioactive food components.

Availability and Utilization of Methyl Groups

SAM and S-adenosylhomocysteine (SAH), as components of methyl metabolism, are 
the substrate and product of essential cellular methyltransferase reactions.  
SAM is derived from an ATP-dependent transfer of adenosine to methionine via 
methionine adenosyltransferase and serves as the proximal methyl donor for 
most methylation reactions.  Cellular methyl acceptors include phospholipids, 
proteins, histones, neurotransmitters, RNA and DNA.  The formation of SAM 
requires a continuous supply of folate, methionine, choline, vitamin B12, 
vitamin B6, vitamin B2 and energy from the extracellular milieu.  
Polymorphisms in the methyl metabolism genes methionine synthase, 
methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR), and cystathione beta-synthetase 
affect concentrations of SAM and likely modify the susceptibility to cancer.  
Investigators are currently exploring the interaction between these 
polymorphisms, diet and DNA methylation.  For example, subjects homozygous 
for the C677T polymorphism in the MTHFR gene exhibited a significantly lower 
level of methylated DNA but only under conditions of low folate status. 

The Dnmts are a family of enzymes that catalyze the transfer of methyl groups 
from SAM to cytosine residues in DNA.  This produces 5-methylcytosine and 
SAH.  Higher DNA methyltransferase activity has been observed in tumor cells 
compared to normal cells.  Chronic dietary methyl deficiency also increases 
DNA methyltransferase activity, which may be an attempt to compensate for 
diminished SAM supply.  Nutrient supply, therefore, appears to play a key 
role in regulating DNA methyltransferase activity.

Selenium is a dietary trace element that is recognized as having potential 
anticancer properties.  Interest in selenium as a prostate cancer 
preventative nutrient is showcased by the recent initiation of the SELECT 
trial by NCI (http://newscenter.cancer.gov/pressreleases/SELECT.html).  While 
selenium is known to modify several aspects of the cancer process, the one 
that is most critical for bringing about a phenotypic change remains to be 
established.  Interestingly, increased selenium concentrations have been 
found to inhibit Dnmt1 activity in vitro and decrease Dnmt1 protein 
expression in vitro.  Consistent with these data, selenium deficiency leads 
to increased Dnmt1 protein expression in vitro. The effects of selenium on 
Dnmt activity suggest that dietary factors influencing methyl utilization may 
also modify DNA methylation patterns. 

Although the enzymes for direct methylation of DNA are well characterized, 
the demethylation process has been assumed to be a passive process.  A 
mammalian gene that codes for a protein that can catalyze demethylation 
recently has been described, however other attempts have yielded variable 
results. Demethylation activity has been hypothesized to be higher in non-
neoplastic compared to neoplastic cells.  Loss of demethylation activity may 
account for some of the differences in methylation patterns between 
neoplastic and normal tissue.  The role, if any, of bioactive food components 
in regulating the demethylation process remains to be established.

Gene-Specific DNA Methylation Patterns

Fluctuations in the degree of CpG island methylation are key to regulating 
functional promoters by modifying the binding of transcription factors and 
methyl-DNA binding proteins.  Aberrant methylation of CpG islands on the 
promoter region may contribute to the progressive inactivation of growth-
inhibitory genes resulting in the clonal selection of cells with growth 
advantage during cancer development. 

While methyl-deficiency leads to global DNA hypomethylation, it also 
simultaneously leads to gene-specific hypomethylation and hypermethylation.  
Preclinical studies reveal that consumption of a methyl deficient diet leads 
to hypomethylation of specific CpG sites within several genes including c-
myc, c-fos and c-H-ras.  This hypomethylation was accompanied by elevated 
levels of mRNA for these same genes.  Folate depletion was shown to produce 
gene-specific, rather than global DNA hypomethylation in human nasopharyngeal 
carcinoma KB cells.  Interestingly, these investigators also reported that 
folate depletion led to hypermethylation of a 5' sequence of the H-cadherin 
gene, which accompanied diminished mRNA expression.  These data suggest that 
global DNA hypomethylation may incompletely predict the response to an 
individual dietary component. More probing studies are needed to characterize 
gene-specific changes brought about by bioactive food components.

Epigenetic events occurring in utero can lead to persistent changes in gene 
expression and can be modified by the diet.  For example, the diet provided 
to female mice of two strains during pregnancy modified the offsprings' hair 
coat color (increased agouti vs yellow) and DNA methylation patterns.  
Expression of the yellow hair color in these mice is recognized to be 
controlled by hypomethylation of the agouti long terminal repeat (LTR), which 
was hypermethylated by dietary supplementation of the maternal diet with 
zinc, methionine, betaine, choline, folate and vitamin B12. Expression of 
this yellow coat color is linked with increased risk of obesity, diabetes, 
and cancer.  While long-term health implications remain to be determined, 
these studies demonstrate that feeding a methyl-supplemented diet increased 
levels of DNA methylation in the agouti LTR and increased the proportion of 
agouti to yellow mice.  It should be noted that this effect occurred with 
control diets that are considered adequate for meeting nutritional needs.  
These data point to the likelihood that in utero nutrient exposures can lead 
to genomic imprinting in the offspring and potentially modify cancer risk.

Invariably, increased fruit and vegetable consumption is associated with 
reduction in cancer risk.  Evidence from a variety of sources suggests that 
flavonoids, including genistein may have merit as an effective deterrent of 
cancer.  Dietary genistein has been shown to lead to changes in DNA 
methylation patterns in prostate tissue of C57BL/6J mice.  After sequencing, 
it was determined that genistein consumption led to hypermethylation at 4 
specific CpG islands, including a dexamethasone-induced product gene 
(D44443).  Neonatal exposure to the phytoestrogens coumestrol and equol has 
been found to lead to specific gene hypermethylation in the c-H-ras proto-
oncogene in pancreatic DNA.  Data indicating that consumption of high fiber 
diets is accompanied by a reduction in estrogen receptor methylation in colon 
tissue from healthy subjects has also been noted.  Hypermethylation of the 
promoter CpG islands is recognized to contribute to the loss of function of 
several tumor related genes, including estrogen receptor (ER).  Overall, 
several studies illustrate that bioactive food components other than 
essential nutrients can influence DNA methylation processes.

Cell Responsiveness to DNA Methylation Defects

The ability of bioactive food components to reduce proliferation in normal 
cells has been reported to be less than in neoplastic cells.  For example, 
selenium preferentially induces growth inhibition and apoptosis in prostate 
cancer cells, but not in normal prostate cells.  Recently, the flavonoid 
apigenin has also shown selective growth inhibition in prostate cancer cells 
without affecting normal cells.  It is unclear if these differences in 
sensitivity relate to epigenetic and DNA methylation processes.  

The gene encoding the pi class glutathione S-transferase (GSTP1) is known to 
be silenced by CpG island methylation in prostate cancer cells.  It has been 
suggested that compensation for loss of GSTP1 activity is possible with 
inducers of general glutathione S-transferase activity and one such inducer is 
the isothiocyanate compound sulforophane found in cruciferous vegetables. 
That dietary factors might circumvent changes induced by aberrant DNA 
methylation patterns in cancer requires investigation.

The short-chain fatty acid butyrate induces cell cycle arrest, 
differentiation and apoptosis in colon cancer cells, but often induces 
opposite effects in normal colonic epithelial cells.  A stable transgenic 
cell line containing a lacZ reporter gene coupled with a hormone-inducible 
promoter was examined for reversal of methylation-mediated gene silencing.  
In the methylated form, the promoter is unable to induce lacZ expression and 
is insensitive to reactivation by the histone deacetylase inhibitors 
trichostatin A and suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid.  In contrast, the short-
chain fatty acids (including proprionic, butyric and valeric acid) were 
capable of overcoming methylation-mediated repression and restored lacZ 
expression to levels approaching that from an unmethylated promoter.

Retinoic acid provides an example that some nutrients may also restore 
methylation patterns and gene expression.  RA demethylated the retinoic acid 
receptor beta2  promoter in acute promyeocytic leukemia cells.  This led to 
cellular differentiation and accumulation of retinoic acid receptor beta2  
mRNA  in these cells.  It is unknown whether other bioactive food components 
also lead to DNA demethylation.

Sensitizing tumor cells to the bioactive food component can also be 
accomplished by using demethylating agents, such as 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine 
(5-aza-dC).  This compound has been used as a therapeutic agent for certain 
cancers, although treatment-associated side effects preclude its general 
usefulness.  Treatment of several cell lines with MLL (mixed-lineage leukemia 
or myeloid/lymphoid leukemia) translocations with 5-aza-dC increases the 
ability of all-trans retinoic acid or 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 to cause 
differentiation.  This study suggests that methylation patterns can influence 
the response to bioactive food components.  These are intriguing results, but 
we need more. 

Other Epigenetic Events

Emerging evidence indicates that various chromatin states such as histone 
modifications (acetylation and methylation) and nucleosome positioning 
(modulated by ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling machines) determine DNA 
methylation patterning. Additionally, various regulatory factors interacting 
with the DNA methyltransferases may direct them to specific DNA sequences, 
regulate their enzymatic activity, and allow their use as transcriptional 
repressors. Continued studies of the connections between DNA methylation and 
chromatin structure and the DNA methyltransferase-associated proteins, will 
likely reveal that many epigenetic modifications of the genome are directly 
connected.  DNA hypermethylation is not likely to be an isolated layer of 
epigenetic control, but is likely to be linked to other pieces of the puzzle 
such as methyl-binding proteins, DNA methyltransferases and histone 
deacetylase. Our understanding of the degree of specificity of these 
epigenetic layers in the control of gene function remains incomplete.

Histone modifications have recently generated excitement in epigenetic 
research, culminating in the `histone code' hypothesis. The idea is that the 
modified histone tails provide binding sites for chromatin-associated 
proteins, which in turn induce alterations in chromatin structure and other 
downstream events. In particular, for silent chromatin domains, histone H3 
lysine 9 methylation by the Su(var)3-9 family of histone methyltransferases 
has been shown to play a key part in the formation of transcriptionally 
repressed chromatin by providing a high-affinity binding site for the 
chromodomain of the heterochromatic HP1 proteins.  Recent evidence suggests 
that histone methylation has considerable epigenetic regulatory impact and is 
likely influenced by dietary methyl group sufficiency.  Moreover, the recent 
finding that some histone methyltransferases function as tumor suppressors 
provides another rationale for continued exploration of the diet and 
epigenetic relationship in cancer prevention research.

Acetylation of core histone tails is a conserved mechanism modulating gene 
expression. It is able to relax higher order chromatin, to promote factor 
binding to DNA and to recruit unique biological complexes that mediate 
downstream functions. A switch from inactive to active chromatin is often 
accompanied by histone hyperacetylation of critical sites in gene regulatory 
regions. The antagonistic activities of histone acetyltransferases and 
histone deacetylases control the nuclear steady-state balance of this 
covalent modification.  In addition to any effect on methylation patterns, 
the short-chain fatty acid butyrate has been shown to induce histone 
hyperacetylation in vitro and inhibit histone deacetylase in vitro.  Recent 
evidence demonstrates that butyrate promotes hyperacetylation of the upstream 
region of the RET gene (a proto-oncogene which encodes a tyrosine kinase 
receptor predominantly expressed in the developing embryo) and increases 
transcription of the gene. More probing studies are needed to characterize 
additional gene-specific acetylation changes brought about by bioactive food 
components.

Calorie restriction is one of the best-documented and most potent 
experimental manipulations for decreasing tumor development in rodents and 
increasing longevity in diverse organisms. The mechanisms underlying the 
antitumorigenic effects of caloric restriction have not yet been elucidated. 
Nevertheless, there is great interest in translating the anticarcinogenic 
effects of caloric restriction into prevention strategies. Recent 
observations suggest that a protein important for heterochromatin formation, 
Sir2, is central for caloric-restriction induced longevity in animals.  Any 
role for Sir2 in cancer prevention requires elucidation.

Objectives and Scope

This PA seeks to expand NCI-funded projects to determine how diet and dietary 
factors impact DNA methylation and other epigenetic processes involved with 
cancer prevention.  Although much evidence exists that dietary components are 
linked to cancer prevention, the specific nutrients and sites of action 
remain elusive.  Diet, in fact, has been implicated in many of the pathways 
of cancer, including apoptosis, cell cycle control, differentiation, 
inflammation, angiogenesis, DNA repair and carcinogen metabolism.  These are 
also processes that are likely regulated by DNA methylation, and possibly 
other epigenetic events, which impact gene function.  The objective of this 
PA is to begin to address the following issues: how bioactive food components 
regulate DNA methylation or other epigenetic events for cancer prevention, if 
bioactive food components can alter DNA methylation or other aberrant 
epigenetic events and restore gene function, and if these components can 
circumvent or compensate for genes and pathways that are altered by epigenetic 
events.

An important aim of this PA is to encourage collaboration between nutrition 
and epigenetic/ DNA methylation experts to study bioactive food components 
with cancer preventative properties and to examine key epigenetic events in 
cancer processes (i.e., carcinogen metabolism, cell division, 
differentiation, apoptosis) in order to begin to establish linkages between 
epigenetics, methylation pattern, and tumor incidence/behavior. Thus, 
competing supplement applications should demonstrate experience in nutrition 
and cancer prevention as well as DNA methylation or epigenetics.
Studies should also link phenotypic changes to epigenetic alterations induced 
by specific essential and non-essential nutrients. The resulting information 
will be critical for optimizing effective dietary intervention strategies for 
cancer prevention. Competing supplement applications can include either 
clinical or preclinical approaches.  The focus should be on how individual 
dietary components influence DNA methylation and other epigenetic events and 
how this correlates with phenotypic change. Very little information currently 
exists about gene-specific changes in DNA methylation as influenced by 
bioactive food components; furthermore, very little information exists to 
adequately evaluate the specificity of individual nutrients, the impact of 
intakes/exposures, and any acclimation with time and/or tissue specificity.  
This PA encourages the submission of novel approaches, within the context of 
existing NCI-funded grants, to unravel relationships between DNA methylation 
and other epigenetic events, diet, and cancer prevention.

A variety of technologies to assess DNA methylation sequences may be 
utilized.  These can be broadly classified into techniques that measure the 
overall content or distribution patterns of 5-methylcytosine (i.e., 
methylated CpG island amplification, methylation-sensitive restriction 
fingerprinting, differential methylation hybridization, and Restriction 
Landmark Genomic Scanning) and those that examine known gene sequences (i.e., 
methylation-sensitive single nucleotide primer extension, and combined 
bisulfite restriction analysis).  The use of genetically engineered animal 
models including transgenic or gene knockouts are appropriate.  The efficient 
utilization of molecular resources such as gene databases and bioinformatics 
may also be used to expedite identification of gene-specific methylation 
targets.   

The following are viewed as relevant examples for the development of the 
competing supplement applications:
o Gene-specific changes in DNA methylation caused by excesses and limitations 
in bioactive food components. 
o Relationship between dietary induced global DNA hypomethylation and gene-
specific hypermethylation.
o Relationship between diet induced changes in DNA methylation and histone 
acetylation/methylation and control of gene function
o Temporality in DNA methylation patterns as influenced by bioactive food 
components.
o Bioactive food component regulation of DNA methylation/epigenetic 
processes, i.e., methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase, methionine synthase, 
DNA methyltransferases, demethylases (or various demethylation processes), 
methylcytosine-binding proteins, histone methyltransferases, histone 
aceyltransferases and deacetylases.
o Linkages between DNA methylation or other epigenetic pattern and the 
anticancer properties of bioactive food components.

MECHANISM OF SUPPORT 

The mechanism of support will be competing supplements to existing NCI-funded 
research project grants (R01), program projects (P01), cooperative agreements 
(U01), and Center Core Grants (P30).  The total project period requested for 
supplement applications submitted in response to this PA may not exceed the 
number of years remaining in the Principal Investigator's active grant at the 
"start date" of the supplement award. The existing grant must have at least 
12 months of support remaining at the time of awards of the supplement. The 
earliest anticipated award date is December 2003.  Because the nature and 
scope of the research proposed in response to this PA may vary, it is 
anticipated that the size of supplements will vary, but in any case are non-
renewable; continuation of projects developed under this program must be 
through other grant mechanisms.

This PA uses just-in-time concepts.  It also uses the modular as well as the 
non-modular budgeting formats (see 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm).  Specifically, if 
you are submitting an application with direct costs in each year of $250,000 
or less, use the modular format.  Otherwise follow the instructions for non-
modular research grant applications.  The modular format applies only to R01 
competing supplements as necessary.

ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS 

You may submit (an) application(s) if your institution has any of the 
following characteristics:

o For-profit or non-profit organizations 
o Public or private institutions, such as universities, colleges, hospitals, 
and laboratories 
o Units of State and local governments
o Eligible agencies of the Federal government  
o Domestic or foreign
o Faith-based or community based organizations

INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE TO BECOME PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS

These competing supplements are directed to grantees with existing NCI-funded 
research project grants (R01), program projects (P01), cooperative agreements 
(U01), and Center Core Grants (P30).  Grantees must have at least one year of 
support remaining at the time of award and the supplemental award may not 
extend beyond the parent grant.  Individuals from underrepresented racial and 
ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged 
to apply for NIH programs. The PI must be same individual as on parent grant.  

WHERE TO SEND INQUIRIES

We encourage your inquiries concerning this PA and welcome the opportunity to 
answer questions from potential applicants.  Inquiries may fall into three 
areas:  scientific/research, peer review, and financial or grants management 
issues:

o Direct your questions about scientific/research issues related to diet and 
cancer prevention to:

Dr. Sharon A. Ross
Division of Cancer Prevention
National Cancer Institute
6130 Executive Blvd., Room 3157
Bethesda, MD  20892
Telephone:  (301) 594-7547
FAX:  (301) 480-3925
Email:  sr75k@nih.gov

o Direct your questions about scientific/research issues related to dietary 
supplements to:

Rebecca B. Costello, Ph.D.
Office of Dietary Supplements
Office of Disease Prevention, Office of the Director
National Institutes of Health
6100 Executive Blvd., Room 3B01, MSC 7517
Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7517
Phone:  301-435-2920
Fax:  301-480-1845
Email:  CostellB@od.nih.gov

o Direct your questions about peer review issues to:

Referral Officer
National Cancer Institute
Division of Extramural Activities
6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 8041, MSC 8329
Bethesda, MD 20892-8329
Telephone: (301) 496-3428
FAX: (301) 402-0275 
Email:  ncidearefof@mail.nih.gov

o Direct your questions about financial or grants management matters to:

Jane Paull
Grants Administration Branch
National Cancer Institute
6120 Executive Blvd., EPS-243
Bethesda, MD  20892
Telephone:  (301) 496-2182
FAX:  (301) 496-8601
Email:  paullj.gab.nci.nih.gov

LETTER OF INTENT
 
Prospective applicants are asked to submit a letter of intent that includes 
the following information:

o Descriptive title of the proposed research
o Name, address, and telephone number of the Principal Investigator
o Names of other key personnel 
o Participating institutions
o Number and title of this PA 

Although a letter of intent is not required, is not binding, and does not 
enter into the review of a subsequent application, the information that it 
contains allows NCI staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan 
the review.
 
The letter of intent is to be sent by the date listed at the beginning of 
this document.  The letter of intent should be sent to:

Dr. Sharon A. Ross
Division of Cancer Prevention
National Cancer Institute
6130 Executive Blvd., Room 3157
Bethesda, MD  20892
Telephone:  (301) 594-7547
FAX:  (301) 480-3925
Email:  sr75k@nih.gov

SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION

Applications must be prepared using the PHS 398 research grant application 
instructions and forms (rev. 5/2001).  The PHS 398 is available at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html in an interactive 
format.  For further assistance contact GrantsInfo, Telephone (301) 435-0714, 
Email: GrantsInfo@nih.gov.

APPLICATION RECEIPT DATES: Applications submitted in response to this program 
announcement will be accepted by the receipt dates listed at the beginning of 
this program announcement.  

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR MODULAR GRANT APPLICATIONS: Applications requesting 
up to $250,000 per year in direct costs must be submitted in a modular grant 
format.  The modular grant format simplifies the preparation of the budget in 
these applications by limiting the level of budgetary detail.  Applicants 
request direct costs in $25,000 modules.  Section C of the research grant 
application instructions for the PHS 398 (rev. 5/2001) at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/phs398.html includes step-by-step 
guidance for preparing modular grants.  Additional information on modular 
grants is available at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/modular/modular.htm.

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICATIONS REQUESTING $500,000 OR MORE PER YEAR: 
Applications requesting $500,000 or more in direct costs for any year must 
include a cover letter identifying the NIH staff member within one of NIH 
institutes or centers who has agreed to accept assignment of the application.   

Applicants requesting more than $500,000 must carry out the following steps:

1) Contact the NCI program staff at least 6 weeks before submitting the 
application, i.e., as you are developing plans for the study; 

2) Obtain agreement from the NCI staff that the NCI will accept your 
application for consideration for award; and,
  
3) Identify, in a cover letter sent with the application, the staff member of 
the NCI who agreed to accept assignment of the application.  

This policy applies to all investigator-initiated new (type 1), competing 
continuation (type 2), competing supplement, or any amended or revised 
version of these grant application types. Additional information on this 
policy is available in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, October 19, 
2001 at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-004.html. 

SENDING AN APPLICATION TO THE NIH: Submit a signed, typewritten original of 
the application, including the checklist, and three signed photocopies in one 
package to:

Center for Scientific Review
National Institutes of Health
6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 1040, MSC 7710
Bethesda, MD  20892-7710
Bethesda, MD  20817 (for express/courier service)

At the time of submission, two additional copies of the application must be 
sent to:

Referral Officer
Division of Extramural Activities
National Cancer Institute
6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 8041, MSC 8329
Bethesda, MD  20892-8329
Rockville, MD  20852 (for express/courier service)

APPLICATIONS HAND-DELIVERED BY INDIVIDUALS TO THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE 
WILL NO LONGER BE ACCEPTED.  This policy does not apply to courier deliveries 
(i.e. FEDEX, UPS, DHL, etc.) 
(http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-CA-02-002.html)  This 
policy is similar to and consistent with the policy for applications 
addressed to Centers for Scientific Review as published in the NIH Guide 
Notice http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-012.html.

APPLICATION PROCESSING: Applications must be received by the date(s) listed 
on the first page of this PA.  The CSR will not accept any application in 
response to this PA that is essentially the same as one currently pending 
initial review unless the applicant withdraws the pending application.  The 
CSR will not accept any application that is essentially the same as one 
already reviewed.  This does not preclude the submission of a substantial 
revision of an application already reviewed, but such application must 
include an Introduction addressing the previous critique.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Upon receipt, applications will be reviewed for completeness by the CSR and 
for adherence to the guidelines of this PA by the NCI and ODS program staff.  
Applications not adhering to the guidelines of this PA, and those 
applications that are incomplete as determined by CSR or by NCI program 
staff, will be returned to the applicant without review.

Applications that are complete and adhere to the guidelines of this PA will 
be evaluated for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate peer review 
group convened by the Division of Extramural Activities of the NCI in 
accordance with the review criteria stated below.  

As part of the initial merit review, all applications will:

o  Receive a written critique
o  Undergo a process in which only those applications deemed to have the 
highest scientific merit, generally the top half of the applications under 
review, will be discussed and assigned a priority score
o  Those that receive a priority score will undergo a second level review by 
the National Cancer Advisory Board.

REVIEW CRITERIA

The goals of NIH-supported research are to advance our understanding of 
biological systems, improve the control of disease, and enhance health.  In 
the written comments, reviewers will be asked to discuss the following 
aspects of your application in order to judge the likelihood that the 
proposed research will have a substantial impact on the pursuit of these 
goals: 

o Significance 
o Approach 
o Innovation
o Investigator
o Environment
  
The scientific review group will address and consider each of these criteria 
in assigning your application's overall score, weighting them as appropriate 
for each application.  Your application does not need to be strong in all 
categories to be judged likely to have major scientific impact and thus 
deserve a high priority score.  For example, you may propose to carry out 
important work that by its nature is not innovative but is essential to move 
a field forward.

(1) SIGNIFICANCE:  Does this study address an important question about the 
role of (a) bioactive food components in DNA methylation or other epigenetic 
event involved with cell vulnerability to cancer or cellular responsiveness 
to cancer prevention? Do studies focus on how dietary components influence 
DNA methylation or other epigenetic event and how this correlates with 
phenotypic change?  Will these research projects advance the field of 
nutrition and cancer prevention from observational to more probing studies?

(2) APPROACH:  Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses 
adequately developed, well integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the 
project?  Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider 
alternative tactics? 

(3) INNOVATION:  Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or 
methods? Are the aims original and innovative?  Does the project challenge 
existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies?

(4) INVESTIGATOR:  Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited 
to carry out this work? Is experience in nutrition and cancer prevention as 
well as DNA methylation or epigenetics demonstrated in the application?  Is 
the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal 
investigator and other researchers (if any)?

(5) ENVIRONMENT:  Does the scientific environment in which the work will be 
done contribute to the probability of success?  Do the proposed experiments 
take advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ 
useful collaborative arrangements (i.e., between nutrition and epigenetic 
/DNA methylation experts)?  Is there evidence of institutional support?

ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA: In addition to the above criteria, your 
application will also be reviewed with respect to the following:

PROTECTIONS:  The adequacy of the proposed protection for humans, animals, or 
the environment, to the extent they may be adversely affected by the project 
proposed in the application.

INCLUSION:  The adequacy of plans to include subjects from both genders, all 
racial and ethnic groups (and subgroups), and children as appropriate for the 
scientific goals of the research.  Plans for the recruitment and retention of 
subjects will also be evaluated. (See Inclusion Criteria included in the 
section on Federal Citations, below)

DATA SHARING:  The adequacy of the proposed plan to share data.

BUDGET:  The reasonableness of the proposed budget and the requested period 
of support in relation to the proposed research.

RECEIPT AND REVIEW SCHEDULE

Letter of Intent Receipt Date:         February 18, 2003
Application Receipt Date:              March 18, 2003
Peer Review Date:                      June-July, 2003
Council Review:                        September 2003
Earliest Anticipated Start Date:       December 2003

AWARD CRITERIA

Applications submitted in response to a PA will compete for available funds 
with all other recommended applications.  The following will be considered in 
making funding decisions:  

o Scientific merit of the proposed project as determined by peer review
o Availability of funds 
o Relevance to program priorities

REQUIRED FEDERAL CITATIONS 

MONITORING PLAN AND DATA SAFETY AND MONITORING BOARD: Research components 
involving Phase I and II clinical trials must include provisions for 
assessment of patient eligibility and status, rigorous data management, 
quality assurance, and auditing procedures.  In addition, it is NIH policy 
that all clinical trials require data and safety monitoring, with the method 
and degree of monitoring being commensurate with the risks (NIH Policy for 
Data Safety and Monitoring, NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, June 12, 
1998: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not98-084.html).  

Clinical trials supported or performed by NCI require special considerations.  
The method and degree of monitoring should be commensurate with the degree of 
risk involved in participation and the size and complexity of the clinical 
trial.  Monitoring exists on a continuum from monitoring by the principal 
investigator/project manager or NCI program staff or a Data and Safety 
Monitoring Board (DSMB).  These monitoring activities are distinct from the 
requirement for study review and approval by an Institutional review Board 
(IRB).  For details about the Policy for the NCI for Data and Safety 
Monitoring of Clinical trials see: 
http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/grantspolicies/datasafety.htm.  For Phase I and II 
clinical trials, investigators must submit a general description of the data 
and safety monitoring plan as part of the research application.  See NIH 
Guide Notice on "Further Guidance on a Data and Safety Monitoring for Phase I 
and II Trials" for additional information: 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-038.html.  
Information concerning essential elements of data safety monitoring plans for 
clinical trials funded by the NCI is available:  
http://www.cancer.gov/clinical_trials/

INCLUSION OF WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN CLINICAL RESEARCH: It is the policy of 
the NIH that women and members of minority groups and their sub-populations 
must be included in all NIH-supported clinical research projects unless a 
clear and compelling justification is provided indicating that inclusion is 
inappropriate with respect to the health of the subjects or the purpose of the 
research. This policy results from the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 (Section 
492B of Public Law 103-43).

All investigators proposing clinical research should read the AMENDMENT "NIH 
Guidelines for Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical 
Research - Amended, October, 2001," published in the NIH Guide for Grants and 
Contracts on October 9, 2001 
(http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-001.html); a complete 
copy of the updated Guidelines are available at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm.
The amended policy incorporates: the use of an NIH definition of 
clinical research; updated racial and ethnic categories in compliance with 
the new OMB standards; clarification of language governing NIH-defined Phase 
III clinical trials consistent with the new PHS Form 398; and updated roles 
and responsibilities of NIH staff and the extramural community.  The policy 
continues to require for all NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials that: a) 
all applications or proposals and/or protocols must provide a description of 
plans to conduct analyses, as appropriate, to address differences by 
sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic groups, including subgroups if applicable; 
and b) investigators must report annual accrual and progress in conducting 
analyses, as appropriate, by sex/gender and/or racial/ethnic group 
differences.

INCLUSION OF CHILDREN AS PARTICIPANTS IN RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS: 
The NIH maintains a policy that children (i.e., individuals under the age of 
21) must be included in all human subjects research, conducted or supported 
by the NIH, unless there are scientific and ethical reasons not to include 
them. This policy applies to all initial (Type 1) applications submitted for 
receipt dates after October 1, 1998.

All investigators proposing research involving human subjects should read the 
"NIH Policy and Guidelines" on the inclusion of children as participants in 
research involving human subjects that is available at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm. 

REQUIRED EDUCATION ON THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECT PARTICIPANTS:  NIH 
policy requires education on the protection of human subject participants for 
all investigators submitting NIH proposals for research involving human 
subjects.  You will find this policy announcement in the NIH Guide for Grants 
and Contracts Announcement, dated June 5, 2000, at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html.  A 
continuing education program in the protection of human participants in 
research in now available online at: http://cme.nci.nih.gov/

HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS (hESC):  Criteria for federal funding of research 
on hESCs can be found at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/stem_cells.htm and at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-005.html.  Guidance 
for investigators and institutional review boards regarding research involving 
human embryonic stem cells, germ cells, and stem cell-derived test articles 
can be found at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-02-044.html. Only 
research using hESC lines that are registered in the NIH Human 
Embryonic Stem Cell Registry will be eligible for Federal funding (see 
http://escr.nih.gov).   It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide 
the official NIH identifier(s)for the hESC line(s) to be used in the proposed 
research.  Applications that do not provide this information will be returned 
without review.

PUBLIC ACCESS TO RESEARCH DATA THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT: The 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to 
provide public access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA) under some circumstances.  Data that are (1) first produced in a 
project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2) 
cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action 
that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed 
through FOIA.  It is important for applicants to understand the basic scope 
of this amendment.  NIH has provided guidance at 
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/a110/a110_guidance_dec1999.htm.

Applicants may wish to place data collected under this PA in a public 
archive, which can provide protections for the data and manage the 
distribution for an indefinite period of time.  If so, the application should 
include a description of the archiving plan in the study design and include 
information about this in the budget justification section of the 
application. In addition, applicants should think about how to structure 
informed consent statements and other human subjects procedures given the 
potential for wider use of data collected under this award.

URLs IN NIH GRANT APPLICATIONS OR APPENDICES: All applications and proposals 
for NIH funding must be self-contained within specified page limitations. 
Unless otherwise specified in an NIH solicitation, Internet addresses (URLs) 
should not be used to provide information necessary to the review because 
reviewers are under no obligation to view the Internet sites.   Furthermore, 
we caution reviewers that their anonymity may be compromised when they 
directly access an Internet site.

HEALTHY PEOPLE 2010: The Public Health Service (PHS) is committed to 
achieving the health promotion and disease prevention objectives of "Healthy 
People 2010," a PHS-led national activity for setting priority areas. This PA 
is related to one or more of the priority areas. Potential applicants may 
obtain a copy of "Healthy People 2010" at http://www.health.gov/healthypeople/

AUTHORITY AND REGULATIONS: This program is described in the Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance No. 93.3393 (Cancer Cause and Prevention 
Research) and is not subject to the intergovernmental review requirements of 
Executive Order 12372 or Health Systems Agency review.  Awards are made under 
authorization of Sections 301 and 405 of the Public Health Service Act as 
amended (42 USC 241 and 284) and administered under NIH grants policies 
described at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/policy.htm and under Federal 
Regulations 42 CFR 52 and 45 CFR Parts 74 and 92.

The PHS strongly encourages all grant recipients to provide a smoke-free 
workplace and discourage the use of all tobacco products.  In addition, 
Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in 
certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of a facility) in which 
regular or routine education, library, day care, health care, or early 
childhood development services are provided to children.  This is consistent 
with the PHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of 
the American people.

The Office of Dietary Supplements (ODS) was mandated by Congress in 1994 and 
established within the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health 
(NIH). The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) [Public Law 
103-417, Section 3.a] amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act "to 
establish standards with respect to dietary supplements." This law authorized 
the establishment of the ODS.


Return to Volume Index

Return to NIH Guide Main Index


H H S Department of Health
and Human Services

 
  N I H National Institutes of Health (NIH)
9000 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, Maryland 20892