Findings
During the V-XII annual funding cycles the CBCRP funded 84 Postdoctoral Fellowship Awards. Of those, 2 were not accepted by the awardee therefore disqualifying them from inclusion in our study. Of the 82 eligible respondents information was received from 61, giving this study a 74% response rate. When appropriate, data from the 2001 Postdoctoral Fellowship survey (39 respondents) was pooled with the current data (61 respondents) to give a combined sample size of 100 awardees. Data from the pooled sample will be presented unless significant differences between the two studies were observed, in which case data from the 2001 study will be included alongside data from the current sample. Additionally, a follow up telephone survey was administered to a sub-sample of 13 randomly selected respondents of the original online survey.
Description of the Sample
Respondents to both the 2001 and 2008
studies were asked to identify their gender
and ethnicity. The pooled sample was
almost perfectly split down the middle
with 49% Females and 51% Males.
Fifty seven percent of respondents identified as Caucasian, 37% Asian, 4% Hispanic, 1% Afro-Caribbean and 1% Indian.
Postdoctoral Fellowships were awarded in all research priority areas with almost two thirds (65%) in the Biology priority area, 16% in Early Detection and Treatment, 10% in Etiology and Prevention and 9% in Community Impact.
Impact of Award on Career Postdoctoral Fellowship recipients’ current positions and the impact of the award on their career choices were addressed in this study. We were interested in how many awardees used the award to transition into breast cancer from other fields, how many continued to be involved on breast cancer research after their fellowship and in what sorts of positions, as well as whether the award had afforded them the opportunity to do research they would not otherwise have been able to do.
As part of both the 2001 and 2008
studies, respondents were asked if they
used the CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship
award to switch into breast cancer
research from another field. Of the total
sample, one third reported using the
award to switch fields, while two third
reported already being involved in breast
cancer research prior to receiving their
award.
Combined Sample: Do you think that you would have become involved in breast cancer research if you had not received your CBCRP postdoctoral fellowship? (n=90)
Respondents who remained in breast
cancer research (n=90) were asked
whether they thought they would have
been involved in breast cancer research
had they not received the CBCRP
Postdoctoral Fellowship. Sixteen percent
of respondents felt that without the
CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship award
they would not have become involved in breast cancer research while 71% said
they would have become involved in
breast cancer research regardless of their
award and 13% were not sure. 
Awardees were also asked if their CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship award allowed them to do work relevant to breast cancer research that they would not have otherwise been able to do. Almost three quarters of all respondents indicated that this was the case, while 16% did not think their award afforded them the opportunity to do research they would not have otherwise done and 11% were not sure.
Combined Sample: Did the award give you the opportunity to do work relevant to breast cancer that you would not have otherwise been able to do? (n=100)
Eighty four percent of awardees remained involved in breast cancer-related work after the termination of their CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship award. Of these, 43% were involved in basic science research at least some of which is applicable to breast cancer, 38% were involved in breast cancer research other than in the basic sciences, 13% were working in some other capacity in the breast cancer research field and 6% were involved in teaching related in some way to breast cancer research.
Current Positions and Future
Career Plans
The 2008 CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship
award survey addressed the current
position and future career plans of all
awardees. Those planning on leaving
research as part of their long term career
plans were asked about the motivating
factors behind this decision.
Respondents were asked to state
their current position at the time of
the survey. Two thirds (41 of 61) of
awardees were in research positions,
14 in non-research positions and 6 were still in their original postdoctoral
position. Of the 41 research positions,
13 were in academic tenure track positions,
13 researchers in industry, 10 academic
non-tenure track positions, 4 were
doing a second postdoc with a different
mentor and 1 was the director of core
facilities at a medical research center.
Almost one quarter of the awardees (14
of 61) were in non-research positions
including clinical practice, several business
positions in biotech, medical writer,
editor of a scientific journal, statistical
programmer, medical resident and independent
consultant among others.
Awardees were also asked about their future career plans. Almost
half (47%) indicated that their long-term career goal was
a research faculty position in academia, another 23% a research
position in industry, 5% a research position either in academia or
industry, 5% a combination of clinical practice and research, 3%
clinical practice alone, 10% didn’t know and 7% listed other positions
including public health, research administration, sales and
marketing in biotech and consulting.
Those respondents who were considering leaving research as part of their future career plans were asked about the motivating factors behind their decision. Half of them (7 out of 14) stated that low compensation in research jobs was a factor, followed by the research funding situation being too discouraging (6), balancing research with family life being too difficult (5) and not being able to find a acceptable position in their field of interest (5) were the top responses given. Six respondents gave other reasons for considering leaving research including wanting to be involved in a more multidisciplinary setting and being more suited to clinical practice.
Only three of the fourteen respondents considering leaving research as part of their long term career plans were male. The most common reason they gave for considering leaving research was low compensation.
Combined Sample:
Please indicate whether you agree with the following statements:
The CBCRP postdoctoral fellowship award helped me gain.(n=100)
Impact of CBCRP Postdoctoral
Fellowship on Career Gains
Career gains attributed by awardees to
their CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship
awards were assessed in both the 2001
and 2008 surveys. Respondents were
asked if their award helped them attain
certain skills and achieve a number of
important career development goals during
their postdoctoral research careers.
A vast majority of respondents reported
gaining grant writing skills, self confidence,
recognition, independence as a
researcher, skills to become a better principal
investigator, and a higher level position.
Fifty-five percent of respondents
reported that their CBCRP Postdoctoral
Fellowship award allowed them to have
greater contact with experts in their field,
and 48% reported that it allowed them
faster career development.
Outcomes from Research Conducted with CBCRP Funds
Short-term outcomes of the CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship Awards, including
publication in peer-reviewed journals, patents and the presentation of work at professional conferences and meetings, from both the 2001 and 2008 surveys are described in the next section of this report.
Publications
Respondents were asked to submit references
of papers published from work done with their Postdoctoral Fellowship Award. Evaluation staff verified publications
submitted for their relevance to the CBCRP award given. A total of 198 publications were attributed to the Postdoctoral Fellowship awards included in our combined sample.
Publication numbers, relevant to the funded project and published during or subsequent to the awardees fellowship, per awardee ranged from 0-10, with an average of 2.0 publications per person and 74.5% of the respondents publishing at least one paper. The average number of publications per respondents and percentage of respondents publishing at least one paper fell significantly between the 2001 and 2008 surveys from 2.8 to 1.5 and 82% to 67%, respectively.
Patents
|
Presentations
|
 |
|
78 and 83 presentations respectively.
A total of 161 presentations were given by CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship
awardees of the combined sample.Obtaining Additional Funds for Research
Postdoctoral research is widely viewed as the launching pad for a career as an independent researcher. Given this, the receipt of a Postdoctoral Fellowship is an important demonstration by a recent graduate that he or she is able to successfully
compete for his or her own research funding. Leveraging the work done with this award for additional funding is critically
important as their career progresses and to maintain an independent research program.
Respondents of both studies were asked if the work done with their CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship was used to obtain additional funding and this information was verified by the CBCRP evaluation staff when possible. There was a significant decrease in the number of additional grants leveraged by awardees between the 2001 and 2008 studies. Respondents
to the 2008 survey reported leveraging 18 grants for over $4.5 million,
including 2 RO1s, an NIH K99 and a CBCRP IDEA grant, as compared to 34 grants leveraged by the 2001 sample for over $8 million. Similarly the funds leveraged per CBCRP dollars
invested also dropped dramatically between the 2001 and 2008 studies from $3.05 to $0.86.
Additional Funds Obtained by Mentors
Work done by postdoctoral fellows is
most commonly continued either by the
fellow themselves as an independent investigator
or by their mentors. Additional
funding leveraged based on the work done
by the CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship
awardees by their mentors was also assessed
by both evaluation studies. A 
difference
similar to that observed in the funds
leveraged by the awardees themselves is
evident. Awardees’ mentors included in
the 2008 study leveraged less than half
the number of grants as the 2001 study (9
compared to 21) for less than half the total
amount (almost $28 million compared
to almost $10.4 million).
The differences observed in funding leveraged by both the awardees themselves and their mentors may be a function of greatly reduced research budgets nationwide1. This has led to reduced funding success rates and has likely influenced more young investigators to leave academic research as a career and therefore not pursuing additional funding.
Follow up Survey on Decreasing
Publication and Funding
Rates
In order to understand the trend of
decreasing publication and funding rates
among CBCRP postdoctoral fellows between
the 2001 and 2008 studies, a follow
up telephone survey was conducted
of a sub-sample of awardees responding
to the original 2008 online survey. As
part of the follow up telephone survey,
respondents were asked to comment on
hurdles they encountered in publishing
their research results and obtaining
additional funding, as well as changes
they noticed in the ability of researchers, in general, to publish or obtain funding
in breast cancer research or research in
general.
Hurdles to Publishing
Respondents reported encountering a
range of hurdles in publishing their research
results. Many of these extended to
their impressions of changes happening
across the field of breast cancer research
and in some cases cancer research in
general. The major themes that emerged
are described below.
Increased reviewer expectations
Respondents felt that reviewer expectations
for the amount and complexity of the data included in a manuscript had
increased significantly in the last several
years. This change was felt to favor
larger, more established labs with access
to many resources such as patient material,
or those taking a high throughput
approach.
Fellowship lengths too short
The limited lengths of postdoctoral
fellowships, in this case 2-3 years, were
found by respondents to be insufficient
time to carry out their funded projects
and produce enough data to warrant a
publication. This was especially true of
respondents involved in research involving
animal models.
Increased competition
Increased competition for academic positions,
and the high profile publications
many felt were needed to compete for
these, has influenced the sorts of projects
taken on by postdoctoral researchers.
Some respondents felt this encouraged
postdocs to more high risk-high reward
lines of research that can be more likely
to fail or more difficult to publish.
Inadequate support
Some respondents felt they received inadequate
support from their postdoctoral
mentors and as a result had a hard time
publishing their results, or doing the
work needed to generate these results.
Hurdles to Obtaining Funding
All respondents interviewed cited the
decreasing research funding budgets
nationwide as the primary hurdle to obtaining
additional funding. Some added
that they had observed that competition
had been further increased by an influx
of new young scientists trained during
the NIH boom years now competing for
their own individual funding.
Feedback and Suggestions
Respondents to the 2008 survey were
given the opportunity to give feedback
about various aspects of the CBCRP
application process and Postdoctoral
Fellowship award. Responses were overwhelmingly
positive with the vast majority
of respondents indicating their satisfaction
with the application process, the
feedback they received, support from the CBCRP research administrators, their
stipend, and the CBCRP symposium.
When asked for individual comments, respondents specifically highlighted the CBCRP symposium and feedback from their applications.
“The feedback CBCRP provides for the grant application is very valuable for young scientists.”
“The symposium is great; but the research administrators are even greater!”
“It was indeed an honor to receive this grant. It was extremely supportive and informative, since it allowed for special meetings and interactions with patients, doctors and researchers.”
“The CBCRP meeting - and the opportunity to meet and listen to breast cancer survivors - was a unique and eye-opening experience. It made the meeting distinct from other scientific meetings.”
Their recommendations for improving the award included increasing the stipend and hosting seminars for awardees.
“Overall, CBCRP award is great. However, for a postdoc, the stipend is lower than average.”
“Specific Training programs: 1. Mentoring by other faculty; 2. Grant writing seminars; 3. Career planning”.
Conclusions
Has the CBCRP helped develop the careers of the Postdoctoral Fellowship awardees?
As a career development award, one of the goals of the CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship is provide the funded fellow with the opportunity to acquire career skills that will be vital to them in their pursuit of a position as an independent researcher. Respondents to both the 2001 and 2008 surveys reported that their CBCRP award helped them gain a number of important skills and attributes. Among these were specific skill sets such as grant writing skills and skills to become a better Principal Investigator, which they will draw from in their future careers. Additionally, they also reported using their award to acquire a number of less tangible qualities such as independence, self confidence and recognition which are invaluable in the extremely competitive academic job search. In fact, more than half of respondents felt that their CBCRP award helped them get a higher level position and over a third felt it helped them get a faculty position (or equivalent) in research.
Outcomes, such as publications, patents, presentations and additional grants, resulting from the CBCRP-funded work are crucial for a postdoctoral fellow to advance as an independent researcher. Respondents from both surveys succeeded in disseminating their results through publications and presentations and securing their intellectual property through patents. However, publication rates decreased significantly between the 2001 and 2008 surveys both in the average number of publications per awardee and percent of awardees publishing at least one paper. Similarly the percentage of awardees leveraging additional funding from the work done with their CBCRP awards decreased from 49% in 2001 to 26% in 2008.
The reason for these decreases is unclear. One major difference between the two reports is the ways the surveys were conducted; the 2001 was a telephone interview while the 2008 was an online survey. It is possible that the more handsoff nature of the online survey lead to under-reporting of publications by the respondents of the 2008 survey. In order to address this possibility the evaluation staff contacted a sub-sample of the awardees included in the 2008 survey and scheduled telephone interviews with them. Respondents participating in the follow up telephone survey were asked to identify the publications and grants leveraged associated with their CBCRP Fellowship on their current CV. The results from these telephone surveys were compared to those reported by the respondents via the original online survey. No major differences were identified between the two reporting methods. What is clear is that the nationwide decreases in funding budgets that happened between 2001 and 2008 have changed the state of the research field, affecting all aspects, including publication and ability to leverage additional funding.
Respondents’ career progression after their postdoctoral fellowship was also assessed as an important indicator of the success of the award as a vehicle for career development. All but 6 of the respondents to the 2008 survey had moved on from their original postdoctoral position to a variety of different careers. Two thirds of them continued on to a number of different research positions, including 10 tenure-track academic appointments. Three quarters of respondents reported planning to pursue research positions in either academia or industry as their long term career plans, and an additional 5% planned to combine research with clinical practice. In comparison with Postdoctoral Fellowship awardees from other organizations, the percentage of awardees publishing at least one paper in the combined sample of CBCRP fellows (74.5%) was lower than that reported by Komen for the Cure (100%) and Damon Runyon (91%). However, variations in the methodology between the studies may explain these differences. It is unclear whether publications were verified for relevance to the funded award in either the Komen or Damon Runyon study and the studies varied greatly in the time that had passed since the award was granted. Additional funding leveraged rates were also reported by other groups to be higher than CBCRP (Komen 59%, Damon Runyon 90%, CBCRP 37.5%). However, these numbers are also subject to the same methodological differences as the publication rates, and are additionally influenced by the much changed funding climate since the publication of the earlier reports.
By all measures, CBCRP postdoctoral fellows indicated that receiving their award helped in their pursuit of future positions as breast cancer researchers. The vast majority of recipients used their awards to support productive, successful postdoctoral research stints and were able to use their experiences to move onto subsequent positions. Together these measures demonstrate success in the development of awardees’ careers.
Has the CBCRP Helped Train
Future Researchers in Breast
Cancer Research or Other
Fields?
The CBCRP funds Postdoctoral Fellowship
awards in order to contribute
to the training of future breast cancer
researchers. The program strives to do
this by supporting outstanding researchers
already working in the field of breast
cancer research as well as attracting
outstanding researchers from other fields
to switch into breast cancer research. A
third of all respondents from the pooled
sample indicated that they used their
CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship to
switch into breast cancer from another
field and 15% said that they would not
have become involved in breast cancer
research had they not received their CBCRP
fellowship.
Both surveys also assessed the continued commitment of awardees to remain in breast cancer research after their postdoctoral fellowships. Eighty four percent of respondents from the pooled sample continued to be involved in breast cancer- related work after their fellowship ended, 63% in either basic or applied breast cancer research. This number is in contrast to 26% of the awardees of the CBCRP Dissertation award remaining in breast cancer research after their award and is indicative of a greater investment on the part of the researcher in the field as their career progresses.
CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship recipients included in the 2008 survey indicated a long term commitment to research in general with 80% planning to continue in research, in one form or another, as part of their long term career goals. Respondents from both surveys were able to leverage their CBCRP awards for almost $13 million dollars in additional research funding from a number of organizations including the NIH, AACR, the DOD, and the CBCRP. These funds will help ensure the futures of these awardees as independent researchers.
Has the CBCRP Helped Fund
Promising New Avenues of
Breast Cancer Research that
have Continued?
The CBCRP strives to fund its postdoctoral
fellows to perform high quality,
innovative breast cancer research that
will continue to have an impact in the
field long after their awards have ended.
One of the ways a funding agency exerts
an affect on the work done in a field is
by providing the opportunity for young
investigators to do work that would not
have been possible with out the agency’s
funding. Almost three quarters of respondents
from the pooled sample of
CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellows indicated
that their award gave them the opportunity
to do work relevant to breast cancer that they would not have otherwise been
able to do.
Awardees were very successful in disseminating the results of their research findings through presentations at professional meetings and conferences as well as publishing in peer-reviewed journals. This exchange of information will contribute to the progress of the field and to the development of new lines of research. Additionally the awardees and their mentors were able to leverage additional research funds from the work done with CBCRP funds. Together this represents over $51 million in additional funding for breast cancer and other cancer research, ensuring that the lines of work funded by the CBCRP Postdoctoral Fellowship award program will be continued.
Recommendations for Possible Program Modifications:
- Require mentors to submit yearly progress reports on scientific and career development. (Already done by DRCRF)
- Allow for renewal of the award with
increased accountability—more reports
from awardee and/or renewal review
(resulting possible increase in staff and/
or reviewer time/effort should be considered).
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the participants of this study who took time from their busy schedules to provide information and give insightful feedback on their experiences as CBCRP awardees.
We would also like to acknowledge the hard work contributed by several additional members of the CBCRP staff in the production of this report: Mhel Kavanaugh-Lynch, Katherine McKenzie, Laurence Fitzgerald, Eric Noguchi, and Lyn Dunagan.
Thank you to the members of the Advisory Breast Cancer Research Council Evaluation Committee who provided valuable feedback and guidance: Angela Padilla, Mary Alice Yund, Catherine Quinn, Roxanna Bautista, Karren Ganstwig, Christopher Bowden, Shelley Hwang, Larry Greene, Jim Ford, and Jeanne Rizzo.
