+ More Filters

Reset Filters

Title

Funding Organization

Funding Type

Eligible Country

Deadline

Other (Select all that apply)

Show Expired Programs

Show Verified Programs

Verified

Quality Improvement in Molecular Testing Pathways for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC)

Pfizer

Program Overview

The American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP), in collaboration with Pfizer Inc. and with participation from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO, invites proposals for pathology-centric Quality Improvement (QI) initiatives aimed at optimizing molecular testing pathways in the management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This grant opportunity seeks to fund sustainable projects that improve biomarker testing practices, strengthen targeted therapy selection, and support care teams in implementing patient-centered protocols.

Goal and Objectives

There are significant advances in molecular diagnostics for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), and these have been incorporated into NCCN Guidelines for frontline therapy. Despite such advances and guidelines, there is significant variability in biomarker testing practices and delays in communicating results that continue to hinder optimal patient treatment decision-making. Current protocols for ordering and reporting critical biomarkers - such as RAS (KRAS/NRAS) and BRAF mutations, HER2 amplification, and microsatellite instability (MSI)/mismatch repair (MMR) status - are inconsistent across institutions, leading to gaps in diagnostic excellence and frontline therapy alignment with NCCN guidelines.

These challenges result in fragmented workflows, prolonged turnaround times, and insufficient coordination between pathology, laboratory professionals, and oncology teams. Consequently, patients may experience delays in receiving appropriate, evidence-based therapies. Furthermore, the lack of standardized pathways and effective communication tools limits the ability of care teams to deliver timely, patient-centered decisions. The overarching goal of this program is to advance diagnostic excellence and improve treatment decision-making for patients with mCRC.

To address these issues, there is an urgent need for collaborative, multidisciplinary initiatives that leverage data-driven approaches to:

• Assess current practices and identify variations in the ordering of various biomarker tests such as RAS (KRAS/NRAS) mutations, BRAF mutations, HER2 amplification, and microsatellite instability (MSI)/mismatch repair (MMR) status.

• Evaluate timeliness and efficiency by analyzing various turnaround times such as preanalytical (order to collection and collection to receipt), analytical (receipt to result) and post-analytical (result to time of action). • Identify variations across institutions in receiving and integrating biomarker test results into a patient’s Electronic Medical Record (EMR).

• Address communication gaps to ensure effective, timely dissemination of biomarker results, thereby supporting prompt initiation of appropriate frontline treatment.

• Ensure that the right patients receive timely, appropriate, evidence-based, biomarkerinformed therapies in accordance with NCCN guidelines.

• Strengthen multidisciplinary team coordination by equipping pathologists and laboratory professionals with skills and tools to improve communication and care coordination, enabling oncologists to make informed diagnostic and therapeutic decisions.

Project Budget and Duration

• Grant Size: $150,000 to $250,000 per project. Applicants should request a grant amount based upon their proposed project budget. Each funded grant site will be required to pay a fee of $50,000 to ASCP to support participation in PDI for data analysis and benchmarking evaluation. This fee should be included in the total grant request amount and incorporated into the proposed project budget.

• Total Available Funding: Up to $1.5 million. Multiple grants will be awarded.

• Project Duration: Approximately 18 months. Grantees will be expected to participate in quarterly calls beginning June 2026 through the end of the project in December 2027.

• Allowable Costs: Direct costs and indirect costs (Institutional Overhead fee capped at 28% of the requested grant amount per Pfizer policy).

• Staffing: Proposals including new positions must include a sustainability plan for those roles beyond the grant period.

AI based application success predictor

While Pfizer does not publish a universal scoring rubric, successful applications share several common features, based on how competitive RFPs are structured and how selections are typically made:

1) Strong Alignment With the RFP’s Topic + Unmet Need

Pfizer grant RFPs are narrow: they focus on a detailed research or clinical improvement question (e.g., pneumococcal carriage post-vaccine introduction).
➡️ Success predictor: Your proposal must directly address the specific gap and objectives articulated in the RFP.

2) Clear Relevance to Patient Outcomes or Public Health Impact

Pfizer emphasizes improving patient outcomes in areas of unmet medical need.
➡️ Success predictor: Demonstrate how your project will advance clinical understanding, improve care, or support better health outcomes rather than just adding incremental data.

3) Scientific Merit & Feasibility

Reviewers look for proposals that are:

Well-designed with appropriate methods.

Realistic timelines and achievable objectives.

Relevant preliminary data or rationale showing feasibility.
➡️ Success predictor: A compelling scientific plan that shows the project can be completed within the budget and time.

4) Organizational Capacity

Since grants are usually awarded to organizations (not individuals), institutions must demonstrate:

Ability to execute the project and manage funds.

Administrative and ethical oversight capacity (e.g., IRBs, data management).
➡️ Success predictor: Strong institutional backing and demonstrated project management ability.

5) Patient-Centered and Health Systems Relevance

Many grants (especially in clinical and QI spaces) look for work that will:

Inform clinical practice (e.g., therapy management).

Fill gaps in diagnosis, treatment adherence, or care delivery.
➡️ Success predictor: Projects that connect evidence generation to meaningful practice change or health care improvements are more competitive.

6) Budget Justification & Responsible Use of Funds

Grant proposals must include a realistic, justified budget tied to project activities.
➡️ Success predictor: Budgets that align precisely with what is needed to answer the RFP’s questions — without excess — are favored.

🧠 Practical Tips When Preparing a Pfizer Proposal

Here’s a quick checklist for competitive Pfizer grant applications:

✔ Extract the exact research or clinical gap the RFP describes.
✔ Frame your aims to directly respond to each RFP objective.
✔ Demonstrate measurable outcomes (e.g., clinical endpoints, educational improvements).
✔ Provide solid scientific or real-world evidence rationale.
✔ Show institutional capability and compliance readiness.
✔ Justify the budget tightly against deliverables.

📌 Summary

Pfizer’s research and independent grant portfolio isn’t a general investigator funding source — it’s RFP-driven and strategic, with success heavily reliant on:

Precision fit to the published topic.

Impact on health outcomes and unmet needs.

Scientific rigor and feasibility.

Organizational strength and execution plan

Specialties

Cancer

Pharmaceuticals

Oncology

Eligibility Requirements

Proposals are invited from various patient care organizations actively engaged in mCRC management. Eligible organizations must be affiliated with a laboratory capable of performing biomarkers testing for mCRC or have established processes to refer such testing to one or more qualified reference laboratories. Examples of organizations that may qualify include:

• Healthcare systems and networks

• Community hospitals

• Cancer centers

Additional requirements:

• Only organizations, not individuals, are eligible to apply.

• The applicant organization must designate two Principal Investigators (PIs) to lead the project.

• One PI must be a Pathologist and the other as an Oncologist (roles may be interchanged as PI and co-PI). • PI serves as the primary point of contact for the applicant's organization.

• Pathologist PI/co-PI must be an active member of ASCP at the time of award.

• Both PI and co-PI must be part of the multi-disciplinary team.

• The PI must be an employee or contractor of the requesting organization. Intra- and interinstitutional collaborations are encouraged, provided all partners have a defined role, and the requesting organization plays a central leadership role in the project.

Eligible Countries:

United States

Sponsor Details

Sponsor Institute/Organizations: Pfizer

Sponsor Type: Corporate/Non-Profit

Address: 66 Hudson Boulevard East, New York, NY 10001-2192

Legal & Affiliation Disclaimer

Affiliation Disclaimer: Trialect operates independently and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or supported by any sponsors or organizations posting on the GrantsBoard platform. As an independent aggregator of publicly available funding opportunities, Trialect provides equal access to information for all users without endorsing any specific funding source, content, organization, or sponsor. Trialect assumes no responsibility for the content posted by sponsors or third parties.

Subscription Disclaimer: Upon logging into Trialect, you may choose to SUBSCRIBE to GrantsBoard for timely notifications of funding opportunities and to access exclusive benefits, such as priority alerts, reminders, personalized recommendations, and additional application support. However, users are advised to contact sponsors directly for any questions and are not required to subscribe to engage with funding opportunities.

Content Ownership and Copyright Disclaimer: Trialect respects the intellectual property rights of all organizations and individuals. All content posted on GrantsBoard is provided solely for informational purposes and remains the property of the original owners. Trialect does not claim ownership of, nor does it have any proprietary interest in, content provided by third-party sponsors. Users are encouraged to verify content and ownership directly with the posting sponsor.

Fair Use Disclaimer: The information and content available on GrantsBoard are compiled from publicly accessible sources in alignment with fair use principles under U.S. copyright law. Trialect serves as an aggregator of this content, offering it to users in good faith and with the understanding that it is available for public dissemination. Any organization or individual who believes their intellectual property rights have been violated is encouraged to contact us for prompt resolution.

Third-Party Posting Responsibility Disclaimer: Trialect is a neutral platform that allows third-party sponsors to post funding opportunities for informational purposes only. Sponsors are solely responsible for ensuring that their postings comply with copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property laws. Trialect assumes no liability for any copyright or intellectual property infringements in third-party content and will take appropriate action to address any substantiated claims.

Accuracy and Verification Disclaimer: Trialect makes no warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of the information provided by sponsors. Users are advised to verify the details of any funding opportunity directly with the sponsor before taking action. Trialect cannot be held liable for any discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies in third-party postings.

Notice and Takedown Policy: Trialect is committed to upholding copyright law and protecting the rights of intellectual property owners. If you believe that content on GrantsBoard infringes your copyright or intellectual property rights, please contact us with detailed information about the claim. Upon receipt of a valid notice, Trialect will promptly investigate and, where appropriate, remove or disable access to the infringing content.

View Funding Opportunity