National Institute on Aging > About NIA > National Advisory Council on Aging > Meeting Information
Print this page E-mail this page

Council Minutes - January 1997

NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON AGING

The Seventy Meeting

Summary Minutes:
January 30-31, 1997

National Institutes of Health
Building 31, Conference Room 6
Bethesda, Maryland 20892

CONTENTS

  1. Call to Order
  2. Public Interest Session
  3. Intramural Research Program
  4. Review of Applications
  5. Review of Intramural Program Activities
  6. The Future of Peer Review in Division of Research Grants (DRG)
  7. Training Discussion
  8. Geriatrics Program Review
  9. Working Group on Program
  10. Report on Advisory Committee to Director and on Committee of Council Representatives
  11. New Business
  12. Adjournment
  13. Certification

Department of Health and Human Services
Public Health Service
National Institutes of Health
National Institute on Aging

National Advisory Council on Aging
Summary Minutes
January 30-31, 1997

The 70th meeting of the National Advisory Council on Aging (NACA) was convened on Thursday, January 30, at 8:30 a.m. in Building 31, Conference Room 6, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland. Dr. Richard J. Hodes, Director, National Institute of Aging (NIA), presided.

In accordance with the provisions of Public Law 92-463, the meeting was open to the public on Thursday, January 30, from 2:00 to 3:00 p.m. and on Friday, January 31, from 8:30 a.m to 12:00 noon. The meeting was closed on Thursday, January 30, from 3:00 p.m. to recess for the review, discussion, and evaluation of grant applications in accordance with the provisions set forth in Sections 552(b)(c)(4) and 552(b)(c)(6), Title 5, U.S. Code, and Section 10(d) of Public Law 92-463.

Council Participants:

Dr. Carol A. Barnes
Dr. Helen M. Blau
Dr. Jeffrey A. Bluestone
Dr. William R. Hazzard
Dr. James S. Jackson
Mr. Jorge J. Lambrinos
Dr. Gerald E. McClearn
Dr. John Q. Trojanowski
Dr. Robert B. Wallace
Dr. Eugenia Wang
Dr. David A. Wise
Dr. Anne B. Young

Ex Officio Participant:

Dr. George F. Fuller

The Council Roster, which gives titles, affiliations, and terms of appointment, is appended to these minutes as Supplement A.

Members of the Public Present:

Nancy Aldrich, Aging Research and Training News
Jerry Barrett, American Sleep Disorders Association
Dr. Gene Cohen, GSA
Bente Cooney, National Osteoporosis Foundation
Elizabeth Douglas, AGHE
Maria Feinstein, Institute for Immunology and Aging
Fran Gillen, ADEAR
Jeffrey B. Halter, American Geriatric Society
Linda Harootyan, GSA
Gail Harris, IQ Solutions, Inc.
Anne Harrison-Clark, PAA/APC
Cheryl A. Hayden, American Academy of Dermatology
John Holmfeld, DANA Alliance
Gail Hunt, National Alliance for Caregiving
Juua Janko, ASBMR, Executive Director
Patricia Kobor, America Psychological Association
Mary Koppa, Institute for Immunology and Aging
Tracy Lawless, American Society for Nutritional Sciences
Marcia Lenstin, IASIA
Tim Lisham, American Society for Cell Biology
Sharon Lou, American Sleep Disorders Association
Kathleen Margione, APTA
Janet Meleney, NOF
Al Nugent, Midwest Research Institute
Patricia O'Toole, FBPCI
Dan Perry, Alliance for Aging Research
Carol Schutz, GSA
Angela Sharpe, Consortium of Social Science Associations
Cynthia Shewan, American Physical Therapy Association
Paula Skedsvold, Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues and American
Psychological Society
Sharnin Spencer, American Psychological Society
Renee Smith, American Heart Association
Alice Wahl, Aging News Alert
David P. White, American Sleep Disorders Association
Pat White, AAI

In addition to NIA Staff, other Federal employees attending were:

Raymond Bahor, DRG
Carl Bensen, DRG
Daniel Brady, LN
Janet Cuca, OD/OER
Ellie Ehrenfeld, DRG
Betty Hayden, DRG
Krish Krishnan, DRG
Mike Micklin, DRG
Scott Osborne, DRG
Jo Pelham, DRG
Samuel Rawlings, DRG
Bob Weller, DRG

  1. Call to Order

Future Meeting Dates

  • May 22-23, 1997 (Thursday-Friday)
  • September 25-26, 1997 (Thursday-Friday)
  • February 5-6, 1998 (Thursday-Friday)
  • May 21-22, 1998 (Thursday-Friday)
  • September 24-25, 1998 (Thursday-Friday)

Consideration of Minutes of Last Meeting

The minutes of the September 26-27, 1996 meeting were approved as submitted.

Statement of Understanding

Following review by the Working Group on Aging (WGoP), it was moved and voted unanimously to raise the cap for administrative supplements from $50,000 to $100,000 without requiring a Council action.

  1. Public Interest Session

Budget

Dr. Hodes presented the FY 1997 budget. The NIA increase for FY 1997 is $36 million, a 7.1 percent increase over FY 1996. The majority of the increase is allocated to grants. The budget mechanism table shows 62 percent of the budget for Research Project Grants, 2 percent for Small Business Innovation Research and STTR grants, 12 percent for Research Centers, 9 percent for intramural research, 3 percent for Training, 3 percent for other research, 4 percent for research management and services and 5 percent for research and development contracts. FY 1998 appropriations hearings are scheduled for March.

Legislation

Excerpts from the Congressional Record regarding Resolution 15 were distributed to Council. On January 21, 1997, Senator Connie Mack (R-FL), with co-sponsors Senators Phil Gramm (R-TX), William Frist (R-TN), Arlen Spector (R-PA), Alfonse D'Amato (R-NY) and Mike DeWine (R-OH), introduced Resolution 15, the Biomedical Research Commitment Resolution of 1997, expressing the sense of the Senate that the Federal commitment to biomedical research should be increased substantially over the next 5 years. Citing major successes from such research, the resolution resolves that it is the sense of the Senate that appropriations for the National Institutes of Health should be increased by 100 percent over the next 5 fiscal years. The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Appropriations. The Congressional Record makes reference to testimony presented at a September 26, 1996 Joint Hearing of the Senate Appropriations Committee and the Senate Special Committee on Aging.

Comments from Public Interest Groups

After providing opening comments about the NIA budget and recent staff changes (described in the Director's Status Report) Dr. Hodes called on the four interest groups who had been invited to make comments. He said that other organizations will be invited to speak at subsequent meetings.

Ms. Judy Riggs of the Alzheimer's Association described three activities of that Association: working to increase the support of Alzheimer's disease research, to support research on Alzheimer's disease, and to improve managed care to better serve Alzheimer's disease patients and their families.

Mr. Dan Perry, representing the Alliance for Aging Research, said that the purpose of the Alliance is to raise the priority that Congress gives to research on human aging. The Alliance works in collaboration with the American Federation for Aging Research, corporations, and foundations on a broad mandate that encompasses basic biological, behavioral and social research advocacy.

Dr. Gene Cohen, representing the Gerontological Society of America (GSA), said that since 1945 GSA's mission has been adding life to years though research, education, and practice. The Society has worked closely with NIA to help speed dissemination of information about aging through its five journals. It also sponsors summer courses, and with the AARP a minority predoctoral leadership development program. The new National Academy on Aging analyzes and disseminates information on policy issues in aging.

The American Geriatrics Society was represented by Dr. Jeffrey Halter. Major activities of the Society focus on clinical care, education, research, and public policy. The shortage of academic geriatricians is a major concern. Dr. Halter described the role the society played in encouraging the establishment of the Geriatrics and Rehabilitation Medicine (GRM) Special Emphasis Panel at the NIH Division of Research Grants and said that the Society continues to advocate for the GRM panel to become an ongoing review group.

During discussion of the presentations, Council members commented on the importance of continuity of care issues. They asked about how organizations integrate their research programs with those of other agencies and organizations. Interest group representatives and their board members and staff keep in touch with a variety of information sources so that they are aware of ongoing activities and of gaps. The involvement of corporations and ways to generate their interest and support was discussed.

Following the discussion other representatives of organizations introduced themselves. These names and affiliations are listed at the beginning of these Minutes.

Presentation by NIA Public Information Office (PIO)

The PIO engages in public affairs, publications and reports, and professional education and health information activities. Education and information functions are included in the legislation that established the NIA. The PIO has staff in both Bethesda and Baltimore. The public affairs function interacts with media and advocacy groups. Press releases from the NIA are prepared by the Office, clippings are monitored, and, on request, PIO staff work with scientists and their institutions and with public groups to assist in the preparation of press releases and other materials. The Office also coordinates speeches and special events.

Information dissemination functions are managed by the PIO and carried out by the NIA Information Center and the Alzheimer's Disease Education and Referral Center (ADEAR). Institute PIO staff, however, do writing and editing for the full range of Institute publications. The Institute receives about 33,000 inquiries annually and has distributed as many as 2 million publications in its busiest year, excluding requests in the Alzheimer's disease area.

The ADEAR disseminates information and responds to inquiries on Alzheimer's disease. It also produces a newsletter, develops publications, and collaborates with other organizations that provide Alzheimer's related information. ADEAR has a World Wide Web site and is making publications available on-line.

The PIO also prepares materials for professional education, including materials for continuing medical education, special packets to assist in the application of research findings to practice, and speakers' kits. The PIO budget is $1.8 million with the largest share going to ADEAR and the NIA Information Center.

Recent Research Findings

The four extramural program associate directors described recent findings from research supported by their programs. Dr. Evan Hadley, who leads the Geriatrics program, reported on the results of two clinical trials. The first, the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly (SHEP) study examined isolated systolic hypertension and its treatment with diuretics. The second was a much smaller comparison of aerobic training and strength training interventions on physical disability among elderly patients with osteoarthritis.

Dr. Hadley pointed out that though diuretics do reduce blood pressure they may raise blood sugar and cholesterol. At issue was whether these negative side-effects eliminate the advantages of reducing blood pressure in hypertensive adults who are diabetic. Because the SHEP study involved many participants, the sample of older adults with diabetes was large enough for the investigators to show that the proportional reduction in the risk of a cardiovascular event was as great in diabetic adults as in adults without diabetes. The investigators also found that the absolute reduction in cardiovascular events was greater among diabetic adults than in those without this condition.

A substantial concern in the treatment of osteoarthritis is whether exercise programs designed to ameliorate the condition may instead aggravate it. A study by Drs. Hazzard, Ettinger and others compared aerobic exercise training and strength training on the function and symptoms of older patients with osteoarthritis. They found a small, but highly significant, improvement in a composite disability score for both intervention groups relative to a control group. Dr. Hadley pointed out that even the 10-20 percent reductions in disability found in this study translate into substantial gains for individuals affected by this disabling condition.

Dr. Ronald Abeles, Associate Director of the Behavioral and Social Research program, reported on a recent initiative that investigated the characteristics of Special Care Units for Alzheimer's disease patients (SCUs) and also on work investigating the likelihood of continuing solvency in the Social Security Trust fund. SCUs are a rapidly growing care option for nursing homes. During the course of the SCU initiative, from 1991 to 1995, the number of facilities offering SCUs doubled. Although all the studied units were described as Special Care Units for Alzheimer's disease, they did not all share the same care practices. Nevertheless, a trend towards greater standardization of care practices was observed. In a sample of SCUs that was restricted to only those facilities that showed all of the preferred care characteristics, placement in an SCU was associated with a reduction in aggressive behavior. When residents in SCUs were compared to those in traditional facilities, the SCU residents were more likely to be male, to be in better physical health, and to be more mobile.

In discussing the social security trust fund, Dr. Abeles pointed out that research on life expectancy, on the size of the labor force, on retirement trends, on economic growth, and on eligibility rules for receiving benefits all contribute to predictions about its continuing solvency. Using stochastic modeling techniques that integrate findings from these diverse areas of research, NIA grantees demonstrated that there is considerable spread in the projections of when the trust fund will become insolvent. Citing a separate study by Burkhauser, Dr. Abeles noted that if the eligible age at retirement was raised, the removal of social security benefits would have little effect on most retirees. However, a small group of retirees who are in poor health and have few assets would likely be vulnerable.

Dr. Marcelle Morrison-Bogorad, Associate Director of the Neuroscience and Neuropsychology of Aging program, described three new findings of relevance to Alzheimer's disease (AD) and aging. The study of Gomez-Isla and colleagues showed no loss of nerve cells in a particular part of the brain across four decades (50 to 90) among a sample of normal, nondemented adults. In contrast, the same study showed dramatic losses of nerve cells in the brains of people of the same age who had been diagnosed with AD. Dr. Morrison-Bogorad mentioned that several anti-inflammatory agents and anti-oxidative agents as well as estrogen appear to show some potential for slowing the rate of cognitive decline with AD. She mentioned, in particular, a study by Mayeux and colleagues who found that AD was less frequently diagnosed among women who had been taking estrogen for at least a year than among controls. Dr. Morrison-Bogorad cautioned that only controlled clinical trials can confirm these promising but preliminary findings.

The third finding described by Dr. Morrison-Bogorad was a report by Hsiao and colleagues that transgenic mice that contain the same mutated gene occurring in some AD families show many of the abnormal changes in the brain that are characteristic of AD. These mice also exhibit progressive loss of memory - like AD patients. The availability of an animal model to help elucidate the disease offers an exciting research opportunity both to explore further the basic brain changes going on in AD and to evaluate new drugs that are thought promising in the treatment of AD.

Dr. Richard Sprott, who leads the Biology of Aging program, described the recent achievement of Dr. George Martin's laboratory in cloning and sequencing the recessive gene, "WRN," that is associated with Werner's syndrome. That syndrome results when both copies of WRN are mutated. Werner's syndrome is a progeroid syndrome, i.e., it is one of a set of diseases and conditions that mimic some part of normal aging processes. People with Werner's syndrome are likely to develop prematurely such age-associated diseases and conditions as arteriosclerosis, diabetes, cancer, and osteoporosis. The sequence analysis of WRN revealed a homology to known genes that code for DNA helicases. These are proteins that unwind DNA strands needed for DNA replication, repair and transcription. Therefore, the absence of such a protein could have a substantial effect on cellular activities. The existence of homologous genes in yeast and in mice provides the opportunity for exploring model systems that lack this protein. In this way, substantial insight can be achieved into the molecular mechanisms of Werner's syndrome, and of aging.

  1. Intramural Research Program


Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease

Dr. Dan Longo, Scientific Director, described the scientific review process for the intramural program and introduced the Chiefs of two laboratories reviewed in the last year. Dr. Lakatta, Chief, Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease spoke about increased risk for cardiovascular disease with age. One of every 2 people over 65 years old has evidence of symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiovascular disease. Hypertension also is a major problem. Both diseases lead to heart failure, the number one discharge diagnosis and the major reason for health care costs among older people. Aging, disease, and lifestyle interact and are risk factors for heart disease. Data from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging indicate structural changes in the heart and arteries associated with aging: moderate thickening in the ventricular walls among healthy elders, a 2-fold to 3-fold increase in arterial thickening in healthy elders, and a 25 percent decline in maximum cardiac output between ages 20-80. Cardiac output is a function of how much the heart can beat and amount of blood ejection with each beat. The observed reduction in cardiac reserve capacity in healthy older people, a function of the inability of the heart to beat faster, is likely the result of slowed communication between the heart and brain which itself is due to a reduced contractile response to beta-adrenergic receptors. With age, the heart enlarges during exercise.

Dr. Lakatta went on to discuss prevention of reduced cardiac function with age. He posited that pharmacologic intervention with NPS (sodium nitroprusside) effectively reduces heart size during rest and exercise. Another approach to prevention is to modulate arterial properties, i.e., to alter thickening or to manipulate sensitivity to neurotransmitters. It is not known yet if this last approach will be useful in prevention of heart disease.

Laboratory of Molecular Biology

Ongoing research in a second intramural laboratory was presented by Dr. George Roth, Acting Chief, Laboratory of Molecular Biology. He reviewed evidence that calorically restricted animals live longer and described work to develop a primate model of caloric restriction and to develop measures of its mechanisms. Investigations of metabolic mechanisms of caloric restriction indicate that calorically restricted animals use energy more efficiently and seem to reset their metabolism away from a growth and reproductive strategy to a survival strategy. Metabolic measures indicate that the calorically restricted animals being studied have a .5 degree reduction in body temperature, increased locomotor activity at feeding time, lower glucose levels than nonrestricted animals, reduced insulin levels, lower blood pressure and triglycerides and increased HDL subfractions compared to nonrestricted animals. DHEA and DHEAS decline more slowly. They also have delayed sexual and skeletal maturation. Arterial stiffness will be examined.

Dr. Roth said that a panel of candidate biomarkers will be assessed as the animals age. For example, mitochondrial DNA, telomere length, pentosidine accumulation, dopamine receptors, and motor function. In response to questions from Council members, Dr. Roth added that leptin levels will be assessed in fibroblast cultures, that behavioral measures are taken, and that immunological parameters, such as vaccination protocols, are being considered.

  1. Review Of Applications


This portion of the meeting was closed to the public in accordance with the determination that it was concerned with matters exempt from mandatory disclosure under Sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S. Code and Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix).

A total of 710 applications requesting $463,677,960 for all years were reviewed. Council recommended 528 for a total of $329,216,959 for all years. The actual funding of the awards recommended is determined by the availability of funds, percentile ranks, priority scores, and program relevance.

  1. Review Of Intramural Program Activities

Section 492(b) of the Public Health Service Act requires the NACA to review annually the report of the Board of Scientific Counselors (BSC). The NACA reviewed the 1995 BSC reviews of the Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease and the Laboratory of Molecular Biology and the response to these reviews from the Scientific Director, NIA.

  1. The Future Of Peer Review In Division Of Research Grants (DRG)

Dr. Ellie Ehrenfeld, Director, Division of Research Grants said that the goal of DRG is to provide the best and fairest review to help Institutes and Centers make good decisions that will encourage progress in their scientific fields. To accomplish this, DRG needs to establish effective networks with the extramural community and within NIH.

Two types of activities are occurring at DRG. Some are process oriented, such as reinvention projects to shorten receipt and referral, and new procedures to shorten time to review amended applications. Some of the changes result from increasing adoption of electronic technology. A range of streamlining trials are ongoing, such as new scoring criteria. A second kind of activity relates to the nature of the organization of science. For example, are applications having the best science assigned to a small subset of review groups so that competition for scores within those groups is disproportionately intense? Are there emerging and orphan fields of science for which current review groups are inappropriate? More generally, Dr. Ehrenfeld raised questions about whether or not the review process is tracking progress in science. Other issues being considered in DRG include balance between depth and breadth among study section members to adequately evaluate the importance of science and its technical merit. She discussed options for study section membership, including different roles for senior scientists and for those at relatively early career stages.

An examination of the organization of review groups is timely also because of the congressional mandate to reintegrate the former ADAMHA study sections into DRG. To accomplish this, DRG, in conjunction with the affected Institutes, decided to focus on conceptualizing the scientific area/fields involved and then structure new study sections. Dr. Ehrenfeld believes that reorganization of study sections according to contemporary and projected views of scientific progress requires expert and credible extramural advisors, particularly for fields less well known to her and DRG staff. Therefore, she plans to recruit experts in clinical and behavioral sciences for temporary appointments. Also, she is addressing approaches to fields in which research is not hypothesis-driven, such as technology development.

During discussion, Council members (1) welcomed the proposed role for senior scientists in review; (2) stressed the role of the scientific review administrators; (3) commented on the possible constraint on reorganization that the disease-oriented foci of several institutes may represent; (4) asked that the Geriatrics and Rehabilitation Special Emphasis Panel be converted to a regular review group; (5) commented on the perception that study sections are conservative; (6) emphasized that NIA applications require review expertise both in aging and the relevant discipline; and (7) commented that young scientists would benefit especially from a fast turnaround time in review. Dr. Ehrenfeld discussed these issues with Council members and indicated that DRG is responding to a number of them.

  1. Training Discussion

Dr. Robin Barr, the NIA Training Officer, detailed the increased stipend rates for predoctoral and postdoctoral support on National Research Service Award (NRSA) training grants and fellowships. He indicated that NIH is developing a plan to provide inflationary increases to stipends in the future. He summarized recent changes in the career awards program at NIA and presented statistics on changes in the number of career award applications received; how they are distributed among Ph.D. candidates and M.D. candidates; and how they are distributed across the different career award mechanisms and across scientific areas supported by the NIA. He reported that the number of career award applications has increased substantially in the last 4 years, that the major increase in number has been among Ph.D. candidates rather than among M.D. candidates, and that career grants awarded have also shown a shift from predominantly M.D. awardees to Ph.D. awardees.

Council members raised concerns about a diminishing pipeline of upcoming clinical geriatric researchers, and about the need to subsidize research training and the decreasing ability of medical schools to afford that subsidy. Dr. Hodes encouraged Council members to consider whether they wished to develop a recommendation on training that could be relayed to other Councils.

  1. Geriatrics Program Review

Dr Hadley indicated that the review focused on those research areas in Geriatrics (genetic epidemiology, cancer, cardiovascular research, infectious diseases) that were not reviewed in 1994. Reviewers also were provided updates on two areas that were reviewed in 1994, menopause and sarcopenia. Dr. Hazzard provided an overall summary of reviewers' impressions and recommendations.

Reviewers characterized genetic epidemiological research as being in a state of healthy turmoil. Because of the rapid changes happening in the field, reviewers indicated that it was appropriate to allocate a high priority to investigator-initiated work in the field but not to commit resources to long-term programs at this time. In cancer and aging research, reviewers recognized many opportunities for research but that these opportunities occur in the context of a relatively small portfolio of grants. Reviewers stressed the need for inter-Institute collaboration. Council members raised the question of whether the small portfolio may be a function of assignments by the Division of Research Grants. Reviewers supported the program's and Institute's decision to increase emphasis on cardiovascular research. They identified a need to develop large animal models, and a continuing need to explore the underlying physiology of aging as important priorities stemming from this increased emphasis on cardiovascular research. Reviewers also stressed the need for inter-Institute collaboration in this area. With respect to infectious diseases, reviewers agreed with the need to expand the area and to ensure adequate attention to vaccine responses and to the immune response in aging, to the impact of childhood vaccination and early exposure to pathogens, to age as a moderator of clinical presentation and severity of infectious disease, and to the spread of infectious disease in closed settings such as nursing homes.

The areas of menopause research and sarcopenia, reviewed in 1994, were revisited at the current review. New program initiatives in these areas were described. Reviewers emphasized the need to connect menopause research to the wider area of endocrine determinants of aging, health and disease. For sarcopenia, reviewers encouraged efforts to explore the determinants of this disorder and recognized that this initiative requires a multi-level approach. They suggested that cooperative studies may be an appropriate strategy.

Dr. Hazzard stressed that a recurring theme throughout the review was the presence of comorbidities in the geriatric population. He emphasized that important work needs to be done to establish models for comorbidities and to inventory existing databases to provide information on comorbidities. He emphasized that the review had been organized around a reductionist perspective. Though that view did generate an exciting catalogue of research activity, he indicated that the greater challenge is to integrate the various research lines into productive cross-domain collaborations. He also emphasized the reviewers' consensus that prevention research should be a top priority at NIA and that such research may itself require a comprehensive, cross-disciplinary perspective.

Both Drs. Hodes and Hadley assured the Council that their recommendations for breadth would be taken seriously. Dr. Hodes observed that the recommendations made in 1994 to focus on the interaction of geriatrics with basic science have resulted in collaborations among programs and Institutes.

  1. Working Group On Program

Dr. Trojanowski reported on the January 29 meeting of the Working Group on Program (WGoP). The manual Guidance for Members of the National Advisory Council on Aging from their Peers was reviewed. The WGoP believed that the document remains useful, as did the full Council. Minor revisions were suggested and will be made before the next orientation for new members.

In addition some other changes to Council procedures were recommended and approved:

1) For review of the Intramural Research Program (IRP) by Council, two-three reviewers would be assigned to lead discussion and to prepare brief written reports on the reports of the Board of Scientific Counselors and the response of the Scientific Director. Dr. Hodes invited Council reviewers to submit a more considered report to him at the next Council meeting.

2) The WGoP learned from NIA staff that the biennial report is optional, not mandatory as indicated in the manual. Council members considered the continuing need for interim reports in light of this new information. After discussion, a motion to prepare interim reports only on an occasional ad hoc basis was passed unanimously.

  1. Report On Advisory Committee To Director And On Committee Of Council Representatives

Dr. Trojanowski summarized information of relevance to NIA and NACA from the 73rd meeting of the Advisory Council to the Director (ACD), NIH. In that meeting, Dr. Helen Smits indicated that funds would be provided incrementally over several years for the construction of a substantially new Clinical Center and summarized the document Revitalizing the NIH Clinical Center for Tomorrow's Challenges . Members of the NIH Director's clinical panel presented 11 recommendations to revitalize clinical research. Dr. Trojanowski reported that the report was enthusiastically received. The Levine report on AIDS was accepted by the ACD and its recommendations already are being implemented. The ACD recommended that information be collected on the successes and failures of the SBIR and STTR programs. The ACD supported a recommendation to create an NIH Associate Director for International Health. Following a complaint received by

Dr. Varmus about ethical and scientific issues in a particular National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) grant on the efficacy of needle exchange programs in reducing the incidence of AIDS, the ACD heard a report from a committee appointed by Dr. Varmus to advise him on these issues.

The meeting of the Board representatives considered reports from its four working groups: These were: Advocacy, Review of the Scientific Directors of Intramural Research Programs, Strategic Planning, and Grant Review. A number of minor revisions to the reports were suggested at the meeting. Members of the working groups will make final revisions to these drafts and it is anticipated that they can be presented to Dr. Varmus at the June meeting of the ACD. They will then be available for review by Institute and Center Directors and for presentation to the full ACD.

  1. New Business

Council members were asked for feedback on the Talking Points About NIH folder that was mailed to them.

Program Reviews were discussed. Council members said they did not consider themselves prepared for their review of extramural programs and were unclear about their responsibilities. They asked for better definition of purpose, context and desired outcome. They suggested that designated Council members work prior to the conduct of the review to define their mission and roles, and that discussion with the Chair of the reviewers prior to the meetings would be helpful. A conference call among Council advisors to plan the program review was suggested and agreed to. Further, for each topic, a one-page set of issues was requested to better focus deliberations. Also, at the time of the review of program itself, an entry meeting with the Program Associate Director was requested. Dr. Hodes reiterated his request for preparation of reviewers' comments over two Council cycles: an initial summary report as was presented, and a second report for the next council meeting that would reflect reviewers' thoughts and make recommendations.

  1. Adjournment

The 70th meeting of the National Advisory Council on Aging was adjourned at 12:00 noon on January 31, 1997. The next meeting is scheduled for May 22-23, 1997.

Attachments:
A. Roster of Council Members (Not available)
B. Director's Report to the NACA (Not available)

  1. Certification

I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge the foregoing minutes and attachments are accurate and complete.


Richard J. Hodes, M.D.
Chairman, National Advisory Council on Aging
Director, National Institute on Aging

Prepared by Miriam F. Kelty, Ph.D.


Page last updated Feb 19, 2009