s of all 4 aims were rather brief and superficial with many high-risk projects included. Little discussion and few alternatives were presented to the many barriers guaranteed to surface in translating to mouse models, not to mention to human disease. The feasibility of aim 3 (using immuno-competent mouse models) was difficult to evaluate given the lack of details, but the enlistment of Lisa Coussens as a collaborator is a strong positive step. Thus, the consensus was that the investigators focus on Aim 1 as the main translational goal while continuing the innovative reengineering of immune cells needed to accomplish this aim. While the science and progress has been stellar, the new management plan and budget are unsatisfactory. Budget justification for personnel and supplies was scant and it was not possible to determine what each person was going to do for the program. In view of the fact that the personnel and focus of the project need to change significantly, it is imperative that a new presentation of a management plan and budget justification be provided to reflect the shifting priorities. Also, successful completion of Aim 1 with the U Penn group will require more than monthly conferences and annual meetings. This plan needs to be well described to assure that research synergy can indeed be achieved despite the geographical constraints. Cross-over of lab research personnel for extended periods may blend the research more seamlessly. The plan should also indicate how specific projects will be rapidly phased out of NDC support. Some of the aims (such as aim 4) should be spun off into separate proposals for funding elsewhere. Overall, this center has performed at an outstanding level, but would need greater focus to accomplish the goals of the program. The following is a consolidated list of strengths and weaknesses compiled from specific reviewer comments. Strengths Development of novel strategies for controlling cell motility by using innovative extracel
Showing the most recent 10 out of 60 publications
