nih research plan

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications

• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Strategies for writing a successful National Institutes of Health grant proposal for the early-career neurointerventionalist

1 Neurosurgery, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, Texas, USA

Maxim Mokin

2 Neurosurgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA

William J Mack

3 Neurosurgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA

Robert M Starke

4 Neurological Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami Beach, Florida, USA

5 University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA

Kevin N Sheth

6 Department of Neurology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA

Felipe C Albuquerque

7 Department of Neurosurgery, Barrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, Arizona, USA

Michael R Levitt

8 Neurological Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA

Contributors PK: manuscript writing, manuscript editing, information research, project conceptualization; MM, WJM, RMS, KNS, FCA, MRL: manuscript editing, information research.

The goal of this article is to provide a succinct review of the key components of a NIH grant application and the NIH reviewprocess for the early career neurointerventionalist.

The authors reviewed NIH rules and regulations and also reflected on their own collective experiencein writing NIH grant proposals in the area of cerebrovascular disease andneurointerventional surgery.

Key components of theresearch strategy include specific aims, significance, innovation and approach. The specific aims page is the most important page of the application and should be written first. The NIH review isbased on these key components along with an assessment of the appropriatenessof the investigators and environment for the research.

Detailed knowledge ofthe key components of the research grant is critical to a successful application. The information in the article may aid in the grant writing for early careerneurointerventionalists.

INTRODUCTION

The outline and structure of a grant proposal varies substantially depending on the type of grant and its funding agency. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant application often represents the most comprehensive application structure, which will be the primary subject of this review. Here we outline the key parts of the NIH grant, along with critical components of each.

For the most commonly-sought research grant (R01), 1 the Specific Aims is a maximum of 1 page and the Research Strategy (Significance, Innovation, and Approach) cannot exceed 12 pages in total. Given the page limit for the latter, we find the use of tables and figures to be extremely helpful. In general, we recommend an average of one figure or table per page to help summarize the data or experiments.

Specific aims

This is the most important page of the research grant and should be written early, with constant refinement. It summarizes the significance, innovation, impact, approach, and investigators of the entire research proposal, all within a single page, which provides the initial and sometimes the only impression of the overall project to the reviewer. It is often used by the NIH Program Officer (PO) to assign a proposal to a study section. Critical components include a well-defined problem of significance, a gap in knowledge, an innovative hypothesis with a strong scientific premise, well-structured aims to test the hypothesis, and a summary of overall impact. Each grant usually consists of 2–3 aims and the aims must be supportive but independent. A well-written Specific Aims page is clear, straightforward, demonstrates the importance of the problem as well as the method of solving it, and provides a set of deliverables or success criteria on a realistic timeline. 2

Significance

The Significance section should highlight the scientific problem important to the NIH mission or a critical barrier in the field and is similar to the introduction of a scientific paper. The importance of the problem is often introduced in ‘scope of the problem’ where the incidence, morbidity/mortality, and financial burden of the health problem are introduced. This section must also present a strong foundation for the project based on rigorous prior scientific research from the literature or the researcher’s own preliminary data (termed the ‘scientific premise’). Finally, measurable improvement in scientific knowledge, technical capability, and clinical practice as a result of the proposal should be described here as deliverables (impact). In general, the Significance section requires 3–5 pages in a 12-page proposal. 3

This is a short section that should only take about half a page. Three critical elements are conceptual innovation (how does the application challenge the current paradigm), technical innovation (new techniques and/or instruments), and the applicability of these innovations (to one field only or more broadly to multiple disciplines). Examples of highly innovative proposals include the application of newly developed technology to an existing problem, approaching an existing problem from a novel perspective, or applying a technique from a disparate scientific discipline to address a clinical question. An incremental step forward with existing technology and well-described mechanisms, especially those that have already been investigated and previously published, is not considered innovative. 4

This part of the Research Strategy details the experiments, akin to the methods section of a scientific paper. The approach must (1) include rigorous methodologies to achieve unbiased results; (2) provide explanation of how biological variables (eg, sex and ethnicity) are factored into research design and analyses; (3) consider all necessary controls; and (4) discuss how data will be collected, analyzed, and interpreted. 5

The approach is usually divided according to aims, each of which should be a self-contained experiment or set of experiments to address a fundamental component of the overall scientific problem that the grant is attempting to solve. Each aim includes the following subsections: (1) introduction/rationale (here is what we want to do and why); (2) preliminary data (they reinforce the scientific premise of the aim, support the hypothesis, and establish feasibility; and (3) research design with sound methodologies. Statistical analysis should include power analysis and consideration of experiments or stratification based on gender and race. Power analysis/sample size calculations should take into account the study effect, tolerated error, interim analysis, and loss to follow-up; (4) expected results (to ensure a good understanding of the experiments); and (5) a brief explanation of potential pitfalls/alternative strategies (to de-risk the proposed aim). Often, each aim will include its own hypothesis to be tested; if an experiment or a set of tests is required but does not completely address a hypothesis, then those experiments or tests are considered ‘tasks’ or ‘sub-aims’.

OTHER IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS IN THE NIH APPLICATION

Project summary/abstract.

A concise summary (maximum 30 lines) of the proposed work written for other researchers in the same or a related field. It usually includes specific aims, research design, and methodology of the proposal. 6

Project narrative

This consists of 2–3 (maximum) sentences written for a layperson and will be made publicly available on funding. It highlights to the public how the project aligns with the NIH mission. 6

The biosketch contains a personal statement with up to four publications, positions, and honors, contributions to science (up to five contributions with a maximum of four publications per contribution), link to full bibliography, research support, and current and completed grants/research projects. It should highlight the alignment of the career theme with the proposal. Personal statements should be tailored to the specific project the researcher is applying for and should emphasize researcher independence, expertise, up-to-date bibliographic information, and current research support. The biosketch requires a specific format that is updated every few years and should not be confused with a curriculum vitae (CV) that some grant agencies other than NIH may require instead. 7

Facilities, equipment, and other resources

This document outlines the availability and capability of institutional resources to perform the work proposed. Details include experimental capacities, laboratory square footage, relative proximity between the different resources, and specifics relevant for reproducibility of the experiments. Photographs are often a good way to communicate the available resources. A well-thought-out and designed research project may receive a poor score if the applicant fails to demonstrate the feasibility of institutional support or infrastructure necessary to successful complete the goals and aims of the proposal. 8

Letters of support

These are proofs of collaboration and endorsement. Every collaborator should provide a letter of support. The support should not be conditional on receiving an award. Letters should be solicited early in the research planning process, be submitted on official letterhead, and outline either (1) a commitment to perform a specific aspect or aspects of the research proposal or (2) general support of the research endeavor (such as by a departmental chair or institute director). 9

Vertebrate animals

This section includes a concise description of the proposed animal procedures to be used and identifies species, strains, age, sex, weight, and total number of animals based on power analyses outlined in the Research Strategy. Justification that specific species are appropriate for the proposed research and why research goals cannot be accomplished using an alternate model are provided. Interventions to minimize pain and distress such as analgesia, anesthesia, sedation, and euthanasia are also described. 10

Human subjects (if applicable)

NIH is committed to increased representation of women, racial/ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities, and other individuals who have been traditionally underrepresented in science. The grant proposal must describe how individuals from these underrepresented groups will be included in all aspects of the study (eg, ‘Inclusion of women and minorities’ and ‘Inclusion of children’ sections) and mechanisms to increase their participation (eg, consent forms in different languages and an ethnically diverse research team). For clinical trials, the ‘Human Subject Section’ should also include protection of human subjects, recruitment and retention plan, study timeline, single institutional review board plan for multisite study (eg, Smart IRB), data safety monitoring plan, structure of the study team, statistical design and power, investigative device or investigative drug status from the Food and Drug Administration, clinical milestone plan (start-up activities, go/no-go enrollment milestones, analysis, and reporting), and results dissemination plan. Common concerns include inadequate details concerning source of data, excessive physical/psychological risks to study subjects, lack of data confidentiality, invalid informed consent process, and unexpected findings. 11

Resource sharing plan

Publications and presentations of the results are common methods of data sharing and should be fully compliant with the voluntary NIH Public Access Policy. In general, a data sharing plan should outline what kinds of data will be shared, who will have access to them and when, where are the data stored, and how will researchers locate and access the data. After analyses are complete, a de-identified dataset suitable for analysis needs to be submitted to the NIH. 12

BUDGET AND JUSTIFICATIONS

The budget should be linked to facilitate achievement of the specific aims. The general budget for a typical R01 is $250 000 per year of direct cost (DC) over 5 years, excluding indirect costs (additional amount paid to the institution by the NIH to cover cost of the institution). Budgets can be modular or non-modular . 13 A modular format requests $250 000 or less per year in DC whereas a non-modular format requests more than $250 000 per year in DC. We recommend a modular budget for the first R01 application of the early-career interventionalist to convey fiscal consideration and a less risky proposal. Should a project need more than $250 000 in DC per year, additional budget details and a strong budget justification are required. The main categories in a budget and justification include Personnel, Supplies, Tuition, Equipment, Travel, and Publications. The following paragraphs provide some guidance and estimates for the application.

Personnel and salary

In general, one aim is equivalent to one thesis and requires a full-time graduate student for 4–5 years or one full-time post-doctoral researcher for 2.5–3 years. The principal investigator (PI) generally has between 10% and 30% effort while co-investigators and senior personnel have effort of between 5% and 15%. Note that the salary cap for the NIH in 2020 is $197 300, 14 so the percentage of salary (based on effort) paid for by the NIH will not exceed this limit, regardless of whether the investigator is paid a higher salary at his/her institution. This is important for the neurointerventionalist because it does not cover salary in general (eg, 30% effort for the PI is only $59 190). Clinical trials will also need to budget for a project manager, safety monitor, research assistants, and coordinators at the main coordinating sites for multicenter trials.

Supplies and equipment

Supplies (such as reagents, software, engineering materials, or chemicals) should be matched to the aims, and separate justifications are given for large equipment purchases, which are often more permanent and more expensive than supplies.

Keeping conference travel cost low is recommended. A travel budget includes number of travelers, destination, number of days, per diem rates, and airfare costs.

On average, 8–12 publications are required for a competitive R01 renewal, and the average cost of publication including public access charges is $3000 (though some journals provide public access for free in cases of federally-funded research). A good estimation is to budget for at least one major publication for every $120 000 of direct cost.

NIH REVIEW CRITERIA, SCORING, AND HOW TO ALIGN YOUR APPLICATION

The NIH review criteria follow the format of the Research Strategy. 15 They include (1) significance of the research. It takes into account the importance of the problem studied, the critical barrier in the field that the study is trying to overcome, and the advancement of scientific knowledge if the aims were achieved; (2) innovation looking for novel concepts or approaches that challenge existing paradigms; (3) approach with sound design, methods, and analyses appropriate to the aims of the project along with acknowledgement of potential problems areas and consideration of alternatives; (4) investigators with appropriate level of training, experience, and complementary expertise; and (5) environment with adequate institutional support and laboratory equipment.

After submission, each application is assigned to a study section 16 that consists of about 20 people from a variety of clinical, research, and industry backgrounds, and overseen by a Scientific Review Officer (from the NIH) and a Study Section Chair (an experienced reviewer). Each grant is initially assigned to an in-depth review by three reviewers (and occasionally more depending on the grant mechanism). Prior to the scheduled meeting date for the study section, each reviewer provides a thorough summary of the grant, including the criteria above, as well as an overall impact score, all on a scale of 1 (best) to 9 (worst). After all scores are submitted, a threshold of impact scores is determined. Applications scored above (worse than) the threshold are not discussed by the entire panel, but rather ‘triaged’ as not suitable for consideration of funding. If the grant is below (better than) the threshold, it is presented by the three in-depth reviewers to all study section members, after which all submit a final impact score. Scores are averaged and multiplied by 10 to derive an overall impact score, as well as a percentile rank compared with other submitted applications. Impact scores of 10 to 30 (corresponding to percentiles of 15% or less) are most likely to be funded and scores greater than 45 are rarely funded, though the payline below which applications are funded varies by grant mechanism, year, and by NIH institute.

Significance, innovation, and approach are mandatory sections of the Research Strategy. To align the rest of an application with the scoring criteria, attention should be paid to the other documents outlined above. For example, biosketches, personal statement, and letters of support are important to the assessment of the investigators and facilities, equipment, and other resources is important to grading the environment.

The general payline for the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) in 2020 is 16% for all investigators and 25% for early stage investigators (ESIs). 1

This occurs when the impact score is just outside of payline.

Discussed and scored

The impact score is below the threshold. The significance and innovation scores are usually much lower (better) than the approach scores in these applications.

Not discussed

These are applications with impact scores above the threshold. The review comments include reasons why scores were high (poor), which can provide a roadmap for revisions to improve a grant application’s chances on resubmission. It is important to be persistent as an application that was not discussed at one session can be funded at the next if appropriate revisions are made.

COMMON REASONS NOT TO GET FUNDED

Many applications are unfunded due to being too ambitious with a wide scope, leading to reviewers’ concern about feasibility of completion of the work in the allotted timeframe. Other applications fail because aims are considered ‘dependent’, meaning that the success of one aim is predicated on the success of another aim; if a single aim fails, then the entire proposal will fail. This is considered too risky by NIH criteria, and should be avoided in favor of either independent aims (multiple different approaches to the same problem) or grant language and preliminary data suggesting that an aim’s success is not in doubt, but rather that the aim seeks to ‘refine’ or ‘develop’ an already successful approach further.

Other possible reasons for lack of funding include an inappropriate study section assignment (for instance, a study section for basic science rather than neuroscience-specific research) or a lack of responsiveness to a specific Request for Applications (RFA) (when an application does not address the particular requirements of a funding mechanism). Both of the above can be prevented by communication with the PO. In fact, for most applications addressing important scientific or clinical problems, failure to obtain funding is often due to ineffective communication by the investigators.

WHAT TO DO IF THE GRANT DID NOT GET FUNDED – THE RESUBMISSION AND RECYCLING PROCESS

If an application is not funded, the investigator can choose between rebuttal, resubmission, and recycling.

Setup a telephone meeting with the PO with a 1–2 page response to review. This may be sufficient to convert a queued application to a funded application, but is only suggested if the application is scored very well.

Resubmission

The advantage of resubmission is panel memory: it gives you a chance to improve your application based on the comments and recalibrate the scoring after revision. For the response to reviewers, list all the criticisms individually and come up with a solution to each of them. It is often helpful to group common themes in the response. After drafting the response (in the form of a single-page introduction), revise the rest of the application accordingly. We recommend resubmission to the same study section if you can address the criticisms appropriately and feel that the study section possessed the necessary expertise and background to correctly judge the application. Further preliminary data or figures to address specific criticism may strengthen a resubmission. Applications are only permitted a single resubmission; however, if the application is not funded after resubmission, it can be submitted again as a ‘new’ submission to the same study section.

In consultation with your PO, the application can be resubmitted to either a different funding mechanism or a different study section. Alternatively, the grant can be resubmitted to another sponsor (such as a foundation or other federal agency) which may require more extensive revision of the application.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful grant submissions require detailed preparation in addition to proper scientific writing. Collaboration and persistence are critical to ultimate success. We hope this brief review will serve as a helpful guide for early-career neurointerventionalists who want to write their first grant application and begin a career of funded research.

The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Patient consent for publication Not required.

Research Proposal

Purpose of the proposal

The research proposal is the initial plan of your thesis project and is written in conjunction with both your NIH and U.K. mentors during August and September during your time at the NIH. The research proposal is your own work. It is essential that all principal parties involved in your research achieve initial agreement on the scope of the thesis project. Writing the research proposal:

• Focuses the attention on the entire research project, not just the next experiment.
• Ensures that a comprehensive review of the literature is conducted.
• Establishes an agreement with both mentors on the scope of the thesis.
• Begins development of technical writing skills.
• Begins development of grant writing skills.

The research proposal also pushes you to think about what is known in the field, how you will contribute new information, and what logical steps must be taken to accomplish your research goals. Students are strongly advised to incorporate alternative strategies to accomplish their research goal.

Format of the research proposal

The proposal length should be no fewer than five pages and no more than ten, excluding tables, figures and references. The proposal should be clear and concise and contain specific aims of what you plan to accomplish during your thesis research.

• Actually quite important - searched and indexed
• Creates an initial impression  
• Can be thought of as a mini-proposal
• Written for a more general audience
• Written last but NOT at the last minute  
• State the explicit hypotheses and how they will be tested
• A bullet point approach is very effective to articulate exactly what you plan to do - it may include a small elaboration
• Often includes a mini-introduction
• Often the "make or break" section for proposals that go through a grant review process
• Typically 2 to 4 specific aims for a thesis
• Success of your work will be measured against whether you accomplish the aims
• Also plays the role of "tell them what you are going to tell them"  
• Sets up the "story" you want the reader to read - lead them toward your research vision
• Establishes you as an authority/ i.e. one who is well-read on the topic
• Shows that you are cognizant of the most important work already published on the topic
• Establishes for the reader the importance of the work
• Helps the reader understand the logical next steps of your specific aims
• Focuses more on what has been done, but also allows for your contributions or unique perspectives  
• Demonstrates that you are capable of deploying the proposed research methods
• Shows the quality and quantity of data already acquired
• Continues to build the case for the feasibility and logic of your proposal
• Include relevant small tables and figures as needed
• Larger data sections can be added as appendices  
• Explains the methodologies to be used to accomplish the aims
• Two separate areas must be covered; these may be interwoven or presented as distinct sections
• Conceptual and experimental design
• Details of the methods
• Should be tied absolutely and unmistakably to specific aims
• Should acknowledge potential barriers and pitfalls and how you plan to get around them
• If you are testing alternative hypotheses, make it very clear how the experiments will differentiate between them  
• Choose carefully - more is not necessarily better
• Important to have a balance between papers of historical importance and more current developments in the field  

• About Grants
• How To Apply - Application Guide

How to Apply - Application Guide

Use the application instructions found on this page along with the guidance in the funding opportunity to submit grant applications to NIH, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Prepare to Apply

• Systems and Roles
• Find Grant Funding
• Understand Funding Opportunities
• Types of Applications
• Submission Options
• Obtain Software

Write Application

• Write Your Application
• How to Find Forms
• Develop Your Budget
• Format Attachments
• Rules for Text Fields
• Page Limits
• Data Tables
• Reference Letters
• Biosketches
• How to Submit, Track, and View
• How We Check for Completeness
• Changed/Corrected Applications
• Standard Due Dates
• Submission Policies
• Dealing with System Issues

• Application Submission Presentations
• Tips for Success Video Series
• Annotated Form Sets
• Samples: Applications, Attachments, and other Documents
• Contacting NIH Staff
• Application Form Instruction Archive

This page last updated on: October 25, 2022

• Bookmark & Share
• E-mail Updates
• Help Downloading Files
• Privacy Notice
• Accessibility
• National Institutes of Health (NIH), 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland 20892
• NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health

• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

• Virtual Tour
• Staff Directory
• En Español

You are here

Include project, include project/down syndrome research plan.

The NIH INCLUDE/Down Syndrome (DS) Research Plan will help guide and coordinate NIH-wide research activities for the next five years. Review the full NIH INCLUDE/DS Research Plan on this page or download the printable version . The appendices for the plan are only available as PDFs at this time.

On this page

Executive Summary Introduction Portfolio Analysis Goals & Objectives Conclusion Appendices

Executive Summary

Since the last National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Plan on Down Syndrome was published in 2014, the research community has made a great deal of progress in understanding many of the co-occurring conditions that impact the lives, health, and well-being of people with Down syndrome (DS). Many NIH-funded studies have addressed aspects of the prior research plans and contributed to improved knowledge of the pathophysiology, treatment, and management of DS. A number of publications demonstrate these advances.

In late fiscal year 2018, the NIH-wide INvestigation of Co-occurring conditions across the Lifespan to Understand Down syndromE (INCLUDE) Project launched to better understand co-occurring conditions that are prominent in those with DS, as well as in the general population. Congressional report language provided several directives to guide DS research and its evolution through the INCLUDE initiative. Although the INCLUDE Project has already stimulated research within its three main components of basic science, cohort building, and clinical trials for those with DS, the value of this investment is just starting to be realized. Certainly, the infusion of dedicated funding for DS research through the INCLUDE Project has catalyzed new avenues of research through a suite of new funding opportunity announcements. The commitment of funds also expands NIH’s ability to support the next generation of DS researchers and trainees and to enhance career development through the INCLUDE Project and other mechanisms. The INCLUDE Project also brings NIH institutes, centers, and offices into the field that have not traditionally supported research in DS by systematically addressing co-occurring health conditions. These coordinated research efforts are focused on developing more treatments for those with DS across the lifespan and on supporting clinical trials to rigorously demonstrate treatment efficacy.

The Portfolio Analysis  section of this research plan offers a broad overview of NIH-funded projects and summaries of some of the key DS research findings, identified from the projects’ nearly 600 publications over the last 7 years, ending in December 2020 (see Appendix G: Bibliography ). This plan also incorporates feedback from many groups that represent the DS community, including: investigators; members of advocacy groups and professional organizations, such as those comprising the DS Consortium (see Appendix A: NIH-Led DS Groups ; parents and other family members; and individuals with DS. Appendix B: Input into Development of the Revised Plan  outlines the process used to develop this research plan. Summaries of the NIH-supported meetings, workshops, and symposia that focused on DS are available in Appendix D: DS-Research Related Meetings Since 2014 .

With this broad input and new opportunities in DS research in mind, the plan reflects five broad themes organized into goals and objectives for NIH DS research:

• Basic Research
• Cohort Development/Epidemiology
• Clinical Research/Co-occurring Conditions
• Living and Aging with DS/Services Research
• Research Infrastructure and Tools

A “Program Portrait” for each section highlights a particular project or initiative that has made significant progress toward addressing that objective. Several new objectives emphasize the importance of increasing inclusion of those with intellectual disabilities in research that affects them, as reflected in the Increase Inclusion of People with DS in Research section within Theme D: Living and Aging with DS/Services Research. The need for greater diversity among both investigators studying DS and the DS populations they study is also a focus, mirroring calls for equality and representation in biomedical research in the United States. 

The plan’s conclusion summarizes recent and future developments that will inform emerging research opportunities in the years to come. For example, the recent recognition that those with DS have altered immune responses to viral infections, such as SARS-CoV-2, adds an urgency to the research activities described in this plan.

This research plan offers a roadmap for DS-related research that can only be accomplished by partnerships among researchers, clinicians, family members, other stakeholders, and most importantly, those with DS, who have much to teach the world.

Introduction

This plan builds upon earlier National Institutes of Health (NIH) research plans on Down syndrome (DS), published in 2007  and 2014 , and on the 2018 research plan  for the INvestigation of Co-occurring conditions across the Lifespan to Understand Down syndromE (INCLUDE) Project. The previous NIH DS research plans have been integrated with the INCLUDE Project’s goals and with extensive public input, including responses to two Requests for Information issued to the general community, to create this comprehensive NIH INCLUDE Down Syndrome Research Plan . A description of the full development process is available in Appendix B: Input into Development of the Revised Plan .

This plan provides the research, clinical, and DS communities with NIH’s strategy to support high-quality, focused research addressing critical health and quality-of-life needs for individuals with DS and their families. Moreover, this plan incorporates more inclusive language to describe people with DS and their families. For example, the plan refers to “people with DS” rather than “patients,” and uses “co-occurring conditions” rather than “comorbidities.” In keeping with NIH policy on inclusion in research across the lifespan , this plan demonstrates that research efforts should include people with DS of diverse ages, socioeconomic levels, and racial and ethnic backgrounds. 

People with DS may have a higher incidence of certain chronic, health- or life-threatening conditions, but are highly protected from other conditions. This health challenge generated the initial interest of Congress, which directed NIH to develop what later became the INCLUDE Project. The breadth of co-occurring conditions covered by the INCLUDE Project garnered involvement of many of NIH’s institutes, centers, and offices (ICOs), each contributing its expertise to the investigation of those conditions (see Appendix A: NIH-Led DS Groups ). The increases in funding provided by the INCLUDE Project have catalyzed new investments in DS research across NIH (see Figure 1 and Table 1 ). Not only will research into these co-occurring conditions improve the care and health of people with DS, but it could also lead to a deeper understanding of these conditions in people who do not have DS, ultimately leading to treatments for the general population. Please note that although the appendices and other sections of this document include 2021 information, the portfolio analysis only includes information through December 2020.

Figure 1: NIH Down Syndrome Research Funding 2011 to 2020

Table 1: NIH Down Syndrome Research Funding, Fiscal Year 2011 to 2020 (all amounts in millions of U.S. Dollars)

Research on co-occurring conditions of people with DS does not happen in a vacuum; it builds on generations of basic research discoveries to develop an understanding of the genetic and physiological underpinnings of DS and the wide variation in the conditions experienced by individuals with DS. NIH’s goal is to prevent these conditions from limiting the capacity of people with DS to lead healthy and optimal lives. 

The goals and objectives of the NIH INCLUDE Down Syndrome Research Plan represent a hybrid of two previous DS plans:

• Down Syndrome Directions: The NIH Research Plan on Down Syndrome , published in 2014 , which was organized into shorter term and longer term objectives with the following themes: Pathophysiology of DS and Disease Progression; DS-Related Conditions: Screening, Diagnosis, and Functional Measures; Treatment and Management; DS and Aging; and Research Infrastructure
• The INCLUDE Project 2018 Research Plan , which was organized into three components: conduct targeted, high-risk/high-reward, basic science studies on chromosome 21 and DS; assemble a large cohort of individuals with DS across the lifespan; and include individuals with DS in existing and future clinical trials

For this research plan, goals and objectives are organized around five broad themes:

Each goal includes groups of objectives, as well as a “Program Portrait” highlighting a specific research project that addresses the theme.

Portfolio Analysis

To analyze the progress made in DS research since 2014, NIH undertook a systematic review of articles from NIH-funded projects published between January 2014 to December 2020, inclusive. A total of 722 publications were identified using the Medical Subject Heading-extracted term “Down syndrome” and the NIH portfolio analysis tool, iSearch. Please note that although the appendices and other sections of this document include 2021 information, the portfolio analysis only includes information through December 2020.

Four subject matter experts (SMEs) curated publications for relevance to DS, the category addressed from the 2014 Research Plan, and status as a critical discovery or accomplishment in the field. At least two SMEs coded each article, and coding discrepancies were resolved by consultation involving all four SMEs. Publications excluded as not relevant to DS were those related to a gene or protein on chromosome 21 with “Down syndrome” in its name, those representing a small case study, or those with minimal mention of DS.

A total of 592 publications were included in the analysis, representing about 82 percent of the original search results. Four additional articles were added that either referenced NIH-related workshops or resources, or that were review articles supported in part by NIH awards, but not identified through the original iSearch portfolio review process. The final total of 596 publications represents a 75-percent increase over the 340 publications cited in the 2014 DS Research Plan.

Articles were assigned to one of the five themes from the 2014 DS Research Plan (see Figure 2 ), with about 80 percent to 95 percent concurrence between two assigned curators; resolution of discrepancies was made by one curator for consistency. There were notable increases in the number of publications in the categories of “DS-Related Conditions,” “DS and Aging,” and to a lesser extent, “Treatment and Management.” (See Appendix G: Bibliography  for the full list of publications grouped by categories from the 2014 DS Research Plan.)

Figure 2: DS-Research Related Publications, 2014 to 2020, by 2014 DS Research Plan Theme Area

Given the short duration since the start of the INCLUDE Project (slightly more than 2 years between the issuance of the first awards and the portfolio analysis), the contribution from INCLUDE-funded projects cannot yet be quantified. Most projects have had not had adequate time to generate data that would support publications.

Highlights from the DS-related research accomplishments since 2014 within each theme are as follows.

Pathophysiology of DS and Disease Progression

Our understanding of the basic mechanisms that underlie co-occurring conditions described in people with DS continues to evolve. Although the precise underpinnings are not well understood, the general molecular and genetic bases of DS are presumed to result from altered gene expression stemming from an extra copy of chromosome 21 ( PMID: 32029743 ).

Over the last 7 years, a more detailed picture of how extra genetic material affects gene regulation and the impact on DS has emerged. For example:

• Gene expression patterns in fibroblasts and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) derived from identical (monozygotic) twins discordant for trisomy 21 (a very rare event) showed that precise domains of gene dysregulation were distributed across all chromosomes, not just chromosome 21, and that they correlated with other markers of chromatin accessibility ( PMID: 24740065 ).
• Comparing DS-specific methylation patterns in cells from brains and lymphocytes of fetuses and adults with DS to cells from control samples identified differences in transcription factor binding sites, suggesting a mechanism for the altered epigenetic pattern of gene expression in DS ( PMID: 26607552 ).
• Evaluating specific genes and segments within the so-called “critical region” on chromosome 21, which is postulated to play an important role in cognitive impairment in DS, revealed that the genetic interactions within it are more complex than initially presumed ( PMID: 26374847 ).
• Small changes in the dosage of many genes on an entire chromosome had a cumulative effect on the features of DS in an individual ( PMID: 28388408 ).

Research has also examined mechanisms that contribute to nondisjunction, or the lack of chromosome separation during meiosis, resulting in aneuploidy or an imbalance in the number of chromosomes in an individual, as occurs in trisomy 21.

• Comparing chromosome nondisjunction in egg and sperm cells showed that the relative inefficiency of cross-over events in female oocytes may contribute to the increased rate of trisomy that occurs in eggs relative to sperm ( PMID: 28262352 ).
• Evaluating genetic markers in children with DS and their parents allowed identification of candidate genes associated with maternal nondisjunction of chromosome 21, contributing to DS ( PMID: 31830031 ).
• A novel approach to potentially improve outcomes in DS attempted to “silence” or turn off the extra copy of chromosome 21 by recruiting XIST, a molecule involved in X-chromosome inactivation in females. XIST “coats” the extra copy of chromosome 21 so it cannot be expressed. Silencing the extra copy of chromosome 21 allowed neural stem cells derived from individuals with DS to develop properly into neurons in culture ( PMID: 31978324 ).   

A number of studies have used mouse models of DS to explore the pathogenesis of co-occurring conditions:

• Tests of the response of heart rate and blood pressure to exercise and stress in the most commonly used Ts65Dn model of DS found that these parameters are similar to the autonomic dysfunction in humans with DS ( PMID: 31496136 ).
• Other evaluations of murine models of DS identified genes that may contribute to the congenital heart defects present in one-half of infants with DS ( PMID: 27029737 ).
• Murine models helped researchers characterize the neuropathological findings and learning and memory deficits in mice across the lifespan, from prenatal into adulthood, including cognitive decline in aging mice. These studies provide a framework for preclinical evaluation of potential treatments for the cognitive features of the condition ( PMID: 25975229 ; PMID: 26230397 ; PMID: 26854932 ).
• Maternal choline supplementation in a mouse model of DS showed improvements in attention and learning in their offspring from this in utero treatment ( PMID: 27840230 ).

Cellular models utilizing primary cultures and iPSC lines derived from individuals with DS have helped explain aspects of neurodevelopmental impairment and neurodegeneration in DS:

• Overexpression of the OLIG2 gene in ventral forebrain neural progenitor cells from individuals with DS produced excessive numbers of inhibitory interneurons and impaired memory tasks in DS chimeric mice. This effect was rescued by knocking down the OLIG2 overexpression ( PMID: 31130512 ).
• Mitochondrial turnover deficits in fibroblasts from individuals with DS suggested the involvement of the mTOR pathway, important in cell turnover, as a potential therapeutic target ( PMID: 31332166 ).
• Although astrocytes typically support and protect neurons in the brain, in DS, they exhibited higher levels of reactive oxygen species and lower levels of factors that promote neuronal function and formation of synapses ( PMID: 25034944 ).
• Human iPSCs can form three-dimensional structures known as cerebral organoids, which mimic the cortical organization of a primitive brain, and have been used to model features of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in both familial and DS forms of dementia. These organoids demonstrated findings similar to amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles that are classic for AD ( PMID: 30171212 ).
• The case of an elderly man with DS and partial trisomy of chromosome 21 who only had 2 copies of the amyloid precursor protein ( APP ) gene and who showed no clinical, biochemical, or neuropathological findings of AD at death established that three copies of the APP gene on chromosome 21 are required in the pathogenesis of AD in DS ( PMID: 27983553 ).
• In cultured neurons from rat and mouse brains, and cells from individuals with DS, excess APP impaired certain cellular functions vital to neuronal survival, thereby linking the pathogenesis of AD in DS to APP levels in sporadic cases ( PMID: 31043483 ; PMID: 27064279 ; PMID: 28851452 ).

Epidemiological studies of DS in humans revealed factors that contribute to the risk of co-occurring conditions in DS and provided information about their outcomes. In some cases, these findings will allow physicians to tailor management strategies and optimize outcomes, thereby improving quality of life for these individuals. For example:

• Multiple researchers identified genes that increase the risk of congenital heart disease (CHD), including atrioventricular septal defects, in newborns with DS ( PMID: 33093519 ; PMID: 26194203 ).
• For infants with DS, CHD, and only a single heart ventricle (rather than two), certain clinical features predicted better outcomes after surgery ( PMID: 26867706 ).
• The incidence and severity of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in infants with DS was higher in those with gastrointestinal complications and heart defects ( PMID: 25604659 ).
• Most infants with DS are screened for CHD in infancy, and those without it are assumed to have healthy hearts. However, researchers found that up to 6 percent of previously healthy, asymptomatic children and adolescents with DS between ages 10 years and 20 years had an unsuspected cardiac diagnosis, suggesting that periodic rescreening may be of value in this group ( PMID: 31588666 ).
• Research identified genes that contribute to the increased risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in children with DS ( PMID: 24747640 ; PMID: 31350265 ). A separate effort showed that the best outcomes for ALL treatment resulted when the dose of chemotherapy was lowered to reduce the risk of infections and other complications ( PMID: 24222333 ).
• Sex differences in the risk of developing AD in the general population did not exist in adults with DS, who demonstrated equal prevalence of AD in men and women with DS ( PMID: 32995462 ).

DS-Related Conditions: Screening, Diagnosis, and Functional Measures

Nearly 200 papers published in the past 7 years have addressed screening, diagnosis, and functional measures of co-occurring conditions in individuals with DS. As uptake of prenatal diagnosis of DS has increased, researchers have refined existing technology and developed novel imaging approaches to enhance prenatal identification of co-occurring conditions in DS. For instance:

• Techniques that utilize cell-free fetal DNA from maternal blood samples, typically obtained at around 10 weeks gestation, have advanced non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) for DS ( PMID: 23765643 ).
• Using single-nucleotide polymorphism-based NIPS assays improved technical sensitivity and specificity in identifying aneuploidy conditions such as DS ( PMID: 25004354 ).
• In surveys, mothers of children with DS reported that they were likely to use NIPS in the future. They also felt that NIPS was likely to lead to more terminations of pregnancies affected with DS, and recommended that more balanced and objective information be provided about DS at the time of diagnosis ( PMID: 24481673 ).
• Novel technology based on genomic profiling of fetal trophoblast cells from cervical samples obtained by Pap smear as early as 5 weeks of gestation showed promise in screening ( PMID: 27807286 ).
• Evaluated brain growth in utero to characterize neurodevelopment in fetuses with DS ( PMID: 31264685 )
• Confirmed that the radiographic “double bubble” sign on ultrasound can predict duodenal atresia in newborns with DS ( PMID: 31167209 )
• Determined features of prenatal lung and vascular development in DS that may predispose newborns to pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) ( PMID: 27487163 )

For some co-occurring conditions in DS, diagnosis is most typically made in infancy. Research on these conditions has found the following:

• Certain factors influenced infant’s risk of developing PAH beyond the newborn period. Although it was often transient, and associated with CHD, PAH was more likely to occur in children with DS who also had OSA, hypoxia, and frequent pneumonia ( PMID: 30025669 ).
• Swallowing and feeding problems are common in infants with DS, leading to potential complications, such as aspiration, pneumonia, and failure to thrive. One retrospective chart review project revealed that more than one-half of infants had some degree of oral and/or pharyngeal phase dysphagia during a videofluoroscopic swallow study, the test typically used to make a diagnosis, and nearly 40 percent required some feeding modifications to prevent aspiration ( PMID: 30588741 ).
• Hypothyroidism occurred more frequently (32 percent) in infants with DS than suggested by previous estimates (15 percent) based on newborn screening results alone, reinforcing the value of retesting infants at 6 months of age ( PMID: 24945161 ).
• A retrospective records review of more than 500 children with DS found that thyroid disease can persist into childhood, with approximately one-quarter of the children demonstrating hypothyroidism, mostly autoimmune ( PMID: 28259872 ).

Heart defects, including CHD, are identified in about one-half of infants with DS. Overall, the following studies suggest that although infants with DS have worse outcomes for some less common types of CHD and may exhibit developmental delays in infancy, many of them recover with regard to cognitive abilities by school age.

• An evaluation of long-term outcomes after single-ventricle palliative procedures found that children with DS had lower 10-year survival (67 percent) than controls without DS (92 percent) for this particular lesion ( PMID: 31332952 ).
• Among infants with DS and atrioventricular septal defects, a more common form of CHD, neurodevelopmental outcomes were impaired at 12 months to 14 months of age. Mothers of these infants reported increased levels of emotional stress ( PMID: 25683160 ).
• Infants with DS and CHD who had surgery in the first year of life ( PMID: 26914309 ) demonstrated poorer neurodevelopmental outcomes in receptive, expressive, and composite language than children with DS without CHD. However, by school age, there were no differences in IQ, language, or academic achievement scores between the two groups (with DS and with or without CHD).

Birth defects registries have pointed to the increased risk of specific types of cancer, specifically leukemias, in children with chromosomal disorders such as DS ( PMID: 31219523 ), but the reasons for this increased susceptibility have not been clear. Studies published during the past 7 years have elucidated the following:

• Acquired mutations in the GATA1 gene in development of transient abnormal myelopoiesis (TAM) in DS as well as additional genetic changes predisposed those with DS to developing acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ( PMID: 31303423 ; PMID: 25533034 ).
• Children’s Oncology Group-led studies identified the distinguishing diagnostic characteristics of TAM and AML in children with DS and the treatment strategies that improve outcomes while reducing toxicity for these children ( PMID: 28389462 ; PMID: 31429606 ).
• Research reported outcomes of children with a particular form of ALL, more common in DS, as well as potential therapies that may improve their prognosis ( PMID: 25049327 ).

Poor sleep can be a significant health issue for children with DS. The following studies show that sleep disturbance is common across the lifespan in DS, that it can impact cardiac outcomes, and that interventions for OSA may be beneficial.

• Two different studies used the Children’s Sleep Habit Questionnaire (CSHQ) to identify sleep problems in more than 60 percent of enrolled children with DS. The risk for sleep problems was amplified in those with asthma, autism, and enlarged tonsils and adenoids ( PMID: 24733987 ; PMID: 26105013 ).
• In a cohort of infants and young children with DS, researchers used home actigraphy recordings to demonstrate that general sleep quality was poor in these children, but that circadian rhythm and phase were preserved ( PMID: 28449894 ).
• Across the lifespan, sleep-disordered breathing and hypoventilation were very common in DS, and OSA increased significantly with age and Body Mass Index (BMI). Central apnea was more common in infants and toddlers ( PMID: 28665356 ).
• Severe OSA was associated with cardiovascular dysfunction, but improved with the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) during sleep ( PMID: 26847969 ).

In people without DS, obesity is often correlated with OSA and other significant risk factors for cardiometabolic disease, but the relationship between these factors in people with DS is less well understood. Several publications since the last DS research plan provide some emerging data about the complex relationships among BMI, OSA, and cardiovascular health in DS.

• Compared to controls matched by age, sex, race, ethnicity, and BMI, youth with DS were more likely to have altered lipid profiles and evidence of pre-diabetes in spite of having less visceral fat ( PMID: 31315916 ).
• Although DS-specific growth charts, including BMI charts, exist and were informed by research, the DS-specific BMI charts are less sensitive than the BMI charts for the general population. As a result, adiposity in children with DS who are 10 years of age or older is undercounteded when using the DS-specific charts ( PMID: 27630073 ). 
• In adults with intellectual disabilities, the prevalence of obesity was higher than in the general population, and this risk was magnified in females and in those with DS ( PMID: 24256455 ).
• Because obesity negatively impacts most domains of weight-related quality of life measures in youth with and without DS, many investigators recommended that healthcare providers address weight issues in youth with DS ( PMID: 28751125 ). However, more recent studies of aortic stiffness and other measures of cardiovascular function in adolescents with DS showed that cardiac function did not correlate with actual risk of cardiac events, such as heart attacks, as compared to the general population ( PMID: 31201031 ).

A number of published studies describe neurodevelopmental and cognitive impairments in DS as well as standardized approaches to measure them.

• Researchers validated the NIH Toolbox Cognitive Battery for use in children with intellectual disabilities and demonstrated specific cognitive profiles in children and adolescents with DS ( PMID: 27602170 ).
• Using the Social Responsiveness Scale to measure the range of social communication impairments in adolescents with DS without a co-occurring diagnosis of autism found that many had elevated scores in some domains associated with autism, suggesting that DS-specific norms should be developed to improve the identification of those with true autism ( PMID: 25657824 ).
• Infants with DS born at earlier gestational ages had higher rates of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), known to be common in people with DS ( PMID: 33230240 ).
• Children with DS showed impairment in working memory, planning, and inhibitory control compared to matched children of comparable mental age who did not have DS ( PMID: 25007296 ).
• Children with DS and infantile spasms had poor neurodevelopmental outcomes, with scores on cognitive, motor, and language all 20 points lower than infants with DS without spasms ( PMID: 26523121 ). 
• A comprehensive evaluation of the motor speech disorders, including ataxia and dysarthria, found in 98 percent of adolescents with DS ( PMID: 31221009 ), showed that these disorders contributed to a lower speech intelligibility (percentage of intelligible words in conversation) ( PMID: 31221010 ).

Vision can also be impacted in DS, and refractive errors requiring eyeglasses are common. Vision-related research findings include the following:

• Researchers evaluated the best method for measuring visual acuity in those with DS ( PMID: 31157125 ).
• Keratoconus, a structural disorder of the cornea that can lead to loss of vision, is highly associated with DS ( PMID: 26707415 ). Between 12 percent and 21 percent of study participants with DS exceeded the cutoff for detection of keratoconus, even though most had moderate rather than severe disease ( PMID: 31479021 ).
• Using a comprehensive battery of visual function tests, researchers noted many similarities between the visual deficits seen in adults with DS and those with AD ( PMID: 23784802 ).

Several published papers characterize the unique impact of trisomy 21 on the immune system.

• Transcriptome analysis in cell lines derived from individuals with DS revealed that trisomy 21 upregulates the interferon pathway, which can contribute to autoimmune problems and a reduced ability to combat certain infections ( PMID: 27472900 ).
• Metabolome studies of blood plasma and cerebrospinal fluid from people with DS showed elevated levels of two metabolites produced with interferon stimulation, which may be damaging to neurons ( PMID: 31628327 ).
• Multiple studies described the mechanisms that underlie the hyperactive immune system in DS. Findings suggest that drugs known as JAK inhibitors, which counteract increases in interferon, might be effective treatments. 

Studies of aging individuals with DS showed the following:

• Studying plasma, neuroimaging, retinal amyloid imaging, and cognitive measures in adults with DS helped monitor the trajectories of AD biomarkers in this population ( PMID: 26441570 ).
• A review of death records found that although heart disease, dementia/AD, and cancer were common causes of death, they were especially prominent at younger adult ages in those with DS; older adults with DS were more likely to die from influenza, pneumonia, respiratory failure, and choking ( PMID: 32680774 ).
• Computer modeling showed that the benefits of screening mammography in women with DS were much less than in average-risk women, given the former’s overall lower breast cancer risks and shorter life expectancy ( PMID: 31385214 ).

These discoveries demonstrate the evolution of the field of DS research to promote refinement of many of the approaches to screening, diagnosis, and measurement of co-occurring conditions across the lifespan, with the recognition that until a disorder can be accurately measured in a population, it cannot be treated. Furthermore, these studies show that there are differences in the identification and natural history of many of these conditions in DS, in comparison to the general population, that require a nuanced approach to their diagnosis and care.

Treatment and Management

Scientific efforts and advances that focus on medical management of DS continue to increase steadily. Since 2011, commercial laboratories have made NIPS-based methods for DS routinely available, evaluating cell-free fetal DNA markers from a maternal blood sample obtained in the first trimester. Researchers are further refining NIPS and its use.

• One study determined that, after receiving complete prenatal testing information via an interactive decision-support tool, pregnant women had improved knowledge regarding prenatal testing, age-adjusted DS risk, and risks of amniocentesis-related miscarriage ( PMID: 25247517 ).
• A 2016 retrospective study showed that when the NIPS assay suggested a trisomy (such as DS), the results were sensitive for DS but diagnostic confirmation via additional testing was still recommended ( PMID: 27371353 ).
• In 2020, the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis published a position statement about first-trimester screening for DS in pregnancies with multiple fetuses (twins and triplets) using cell-free DNA; although this screening had not been previously recommended, the available evidence had sufficiently high-detection and low false-positive rates to support it ( PMID: 33016373 ).

Earlier prenatal diagnosis of DS raises the possibility of in utero treatments that might improve cognition and other features of DS, although such studies would need to be pursued in a rigorous and ethically responsible manner ( PMID: 28004394 ).

• Maternal choline supplementation improved cognitive function and protected forebrain neurons in affected offspring in a mouse model of DS ( PMID: 26391046 ).
• Prenatal treatment with epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG), a green tea extract that inhibits a gene on chromosome 21 known as Dyrk1a , reduced craniofacial development problems in a mouse model of DS ( PMID: 28172997 ).
• A systematic evaluation of gene-expression data from human and mouse fetal DS samples identified drugs already approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that could rescue the abnormal transcript patterns ( PMID: 27586445 ). The researchers identified an antioxidant, apigenin, that improved cognitive development, memory, and inflammation in a mouse model of DS when administered pre- and postnatally ( PMID: 33098770 ).
• Researchers are exploring attitudes of parents of children with DS toward the hypothetical use of prenatal therapies to silence the extra chromosome 21 or medications to improve aspects of cognition ( PMID: 31877259 ).

Studies also focus on management strategies and surgical interventions, when appropriate, for children with DS and CHD and OSA. Findings showed that surgical repair of heart defects in infants with DS had a significant impact on survival and positive outcomes; in contrast, medical and surgical management of OSA was more variable with regard to outcomes and evaluation.

• A landmark review, published in 2014, found that of 2,399 infants born with complete atrioventricular septal defect, 78 percent of whom had DS, who had surgery early in their first year of life, had generally good outcomes. Infants with DS had lower rates of death and major complications in the study than infants without DS ( PMID: 25125206 ).
• A retrospective chart review identified children with OSA and/or behavioral sleep disturbances. Despite high rates of reported sleep problems, less than one-half underwent formal sleep study, called polysomnogram (PSG), but about 80 percent of those with sleep problems received sleep intervention ( PMID: 27541580 ).
• Adherence to the nighttime CPAP appliance among children with OSA was only approximately 50 percent, but compliance was higher in those with developmental delay, and in females with DS ( PMID: 27092702 ).
• Management approaches to OSA in children without enlarged tonsils required more evidence to refine the use of oral appliances and CPAP in children with DS ( PMID: 26598935 ).
• A study on the impact of 2011 guidelines, which recommended a pre-surgical PSG before adenotonsillectomy (removal of adenoids and tonsils), found that high-risk populations, including those with DS, were more likely to have a pre-surgical sleep study after the guidelines were published ( PMID: 32427548 ).

Advances in treatments for children with DS and leukemia have led to refined chemotherapy approaches that optimize survival and minimize relapse.

• Survival rates for children with DS and AML were high, but these children were more likely to have chronic health conditions that impacted quality of life than children without DS who had survived AML ( PMID: 27906794 ).
• In children with standard-risk ALL, the total tolerated dose of methotrexate was lower in those with DS because of an increase in side effects, such as mouth sores. Otherwise, children with DS and standard-risk ALL had excellent survival rates ( PMID: 31160295 ).
• Children and adolescents with DS and ALL had similar rates of remission and relapse to those without DS, but higher rates of toxicity, such as infections ( PMID: 29878490 ).
• Among survivors of both types of childhood leukemia, those with DS were more likely to have serious chronic health conditions than those without DS, but the DS group also had a decreased risk of secondary cancers ( PMID: 29105081 ).
• An experimental method of chromosome silencing in human fetal blood cells restored normal blood cell development ( PMID: 30518921 ); although the approach is not feasible for treating DS-related leukemias, it remains a tantalizing area of research.

Several studies have evaluated strategies to improve speech development and communication in children with DS.

• Language development was enhanced when children with intellectual disabilities, such as DS, gestured at objects before they were able to label them, and when parents then translated these gestures into words ( PMID: 26362150 ).
• Providing families with feedback on child progress across early skills, such as vocalizations between young children with DS and their parents, increased child vocalizations and conversational exchanges for those with DS compared to typically developing peers ( PMID: 24686777 ).
• A study on the elements of speech intelligibility in children and adults with DS showed that the ability to be understood increased with age for children with DS, especially between the ages of 4 and 16 years. These findings have implications for future assessment and intervention strategies ( PMID: 29214307 ).
• In the context of expressive language skills among adolescent males with DS, family-related factors, such as closeness of the mother-child relationship, over time provided some protection from reduction in the quality of language exchanges ( PMID: 32593286 ).
• Multiple strategies helped children with DS access and efficiently use Augmentative and Alternative Communication to further improve their communication skills ( PMID: 31398294 ; PMID: 31697898 ).

In the context of efforts focused on motor skills, researchers made the following discoveries:

• The use of a modified, electric-powered ride-on car encouraged mobility and socialization for children with developmental delays, including DS. The research team tested whether infants with DS could use the car to develop independent mobility during regular at-home driving sessions, and found that most of the tested infants enjoyed the experience and had improved social and motor skills ( PMID: 30557294 ).
• After adults with DS completed a 12-week exercise intervention, participants had improved performance on two measures of memory, suggesting that physical exercise may help maintain aspects of cognition and memory in individuals with DS as they age ( PMID: 29501470 ).

Taken together, these studies and reports provide evidence of advances that can improve quality of life across the age spectrum for individuals with DS.

DS and Aging

Since the last NIH DS research plan was published, researchers have made a great deal of progress in understanding the aging progress in DS, and studying the progression of symptoms from Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) to AD dementia has been an area of focused study in this high-risk population. In 2015, investigators, advocacy and research organizations, and NIH institutes and centers came together to set a roadmap for studies of AD in DS (DS-AD) ( PMID: 25510383 ; PMID: 32544310 ). Emerging evidence also suggests many similarities in the development of MCI and AD between the high-risk aging DS population and the general population. Additional progress includes the following:

• Based on California Medicare claims data to characterize the frequency of AD in the aging adult population (older than 45 years of age) with DS, nearly 50 percent those 65 or older had a dementia diagnosis. Many adults with DS also had several co-occurring, but treatable conditions ( PMID: 30032260 ).
• Researchers used Medicaid claims data from the state of Wisconsin ( PMID: 31657825 ) to further describe the epidemiology of DS-AD. The study found that the prevalence of dementia claims rose from 19 percent in the 40- to 54-year-old cohort to 52 percent in those age 55 years or older, similar to rates of dementia observed in the clinical setting.
• A molecular “signature” study of aging showed that blood and brain tissue from adults with DS were an average of 6.6 years older than cells from adults without DS of the same age ( PMID: 25678027 ).
• Disruption of signaling in neurons in the locus coeruleus, a specific portion of the brain associated with working memory, learning, and attention, caused inflammation and memory loss in this mouse model ( PMID: 31678403 ).
• Chronic administration of an agent that treats neural inflammation in middle-aged Ts65Dn mice reduced typical memory loss, inflammatory cytokines, and microglial activation ( PMID: 31944407 ). 
• Inhibition of an enzyme known as BACE1, which cleaves APP, reduced the deposition of amyloid in the brains of a different mouse model of DS, indicating the potential value of BACE1 modulation as a therapeutic target to prevent neurodegeneration in DS-AD ( PMID: 26923405 ).
• Injecting extracts of the tau protein, part of the neurofibrillary “tangles” observed in AD brains, from the brains of adults with DS-AD into the brains of transgenic mice that overexpress tau resulted in spread of neurofibrillary tangles and eventual loss of neurons ( PMID: 25534024 ).
• Brains from individuals with DS-AD demonstrated tau phosphorylation and abnormal processing before the development of neurofibrillary tangles. The finding confirmed the association with AD in those with DS ( PMID: 24033439 ), similar to the disease course in those without DS.

One of the challenges in studying DS-AD is accurate assessment of progressive dementia within a population that already has a broad range of baseline intellectual disability. Creating measures to document the transition from MCI to AD is critical to understanding the evolution of DS-AD, and for the development of therapies.

• Researchers successfully adapted an instrument that is currently used in the general population, by all federally funded Alzheimer Disease Research Centers (ADRCs), for use in adults with DS. The instrument captures a range of cognitive impairment in adults with DS that can then be used to track progression of AD in this population ( PMID: 31842726 ).
• The National Task Group-Early Detection Screen for Dementia, a measure developed to assess MCI and dementia in those with intellectual disability, proved to be a useful tool for evaluating dementia status in a sample of 185 adults with DS ( PMID: 33314467 ).
• The role of APP, tau, and neuroinflammation in AD progression among adults with DS seemed to be similar to that in familial and sporadic AD in those without DS, a finding that may facilitate development of treatments in both populations ( PMID: 30733618 ).

The Alzheimer’s Biomarker Consortium-Down Syndrome (ABC-DS) project (see Program Portrait 4 ) has yielded many important insights into the role of aging in DS. Funded since 2015 by NIH, two groups of investigators have recruited nearly 500 participants with DS, older than 25 years of age, to study cognitive measures, neuroimaging findings, genetic markers in biological specimens, lifestyle, and environmental factors that predict risk and resilience for development of AD ( PMID: 32058812 ).

• Neuroimaging findings measuring positron emission tomography tracer PiB showed that β-amyloid accumulation is associated with declining cognitive functioning in adults with DS who have preclinical AD ( PMID: 28715661 ).
• Adults with DS also had a loss of gray matter volume and reduced brain glucose utilization with development of AD ( PMID: 29254096 ).
• Cerebrovascular disease, characterized by cerebral amyloid angiopathy and microbleeds seen on brain pathology, was more common in adults with DS who had symptoms of AD ( PMID: 29195510 ; PMID: 30452414 ).
• Disrupted sleep was associated with amyloid accumulation and cognitive features of preclinical AD, suggesting that aspects of lifestyle may be modifiable risk factors for dementia in adults with DS ( PMID: 32447011 ).

Exploration of AD biomarkers in blood plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from adults with DS revealed some of the most significant findings:

• Plasma and CSF biomarkers of amyloid, tau, and neurofilament light protein had good diagnostic performance for detecting AD in adults with DS, and may have utility for the early detection of AD in these individuals ( PMID: 30172624 ).
• Plasma proteomic ( PMID: 32435687 ; PMID: 32626817 ) and metabolomic ( PMID: 32258359 ) signatures helped predict MCI and later AD development in those with DS as they age, and similar biomarker profiles in CSF provided additional insights ( PMID: 32671183 ). These studies and many others point to the potential to use such biomarkers in clinical trials to prevent and/or treat AD in DS ( PMID: 34942129 ). 

Research Infrastructure

In the domain of research infrastructure, a number of resources have been created to support scientific inquiry. New animal and cellular models of DS have helped to understand the basic biology that underlies the condition. By collecting information about individuals with DS, tools such as registries and outcome measures can elucidate the prevalence of co-occurring conditions in DS and support development of treatments and interventions for these co-occurring conditions (see Program Portrait 2 ).

• Although brain development, gene expression, and behavioral phenotypes have been characterized prenatally and postnatally in several well-known mouse models ( PMID: 29716957 ), researchers created and characterized an entirely new mouse strain, the TcMAC21 mouse ( PMID: 32597754 ), that may serve as the most complete genetic mouse model of DS to date. This strain contains an extra copy of human chromosome 21 with a mouse centromere, to maintain fidelity of segregation in daughter cells, and it replicates many phenotypes found in the human condition.
• Additional exploration of chromosome 21 genes in zebrafish ( PMID: 29760202 ) and worms ( PMID: 29367452 ) may allow improved understanding of the functional impacts of trisomy on critical genes conserved across many species and provide insights into understanding development of DS in humans. 
• Researchers using human stem cells have capitalized on the value of re-differentiating iPSCs into neural and glial derivatives to understand neurodevelopment ( PMID: 32058817 ); in addition, methods to create 3-D spheroids can be used to model more advanced brain development in DS.
• A brain transcriptome developmental atlas demonstrated that many genes associated with oligodendrocyte differentiation, which is critical for myelination and white matter development, were dysregulated in DS ( PMID: 26924435 ).
• Methylation pattern comparisons of brain and other tissue samples from individuals with DS and controls shed light on differentially methylated regions of the genome and provided a resource to understand epigenomic gene regulation in a tissue-specific manner ( PMID: 31010359 ).
• Publication of revised U.S. growth charts specifically for children with DS enhanced understanding of height, weight, and BMI. These charts will allow better longitudinal tracking of children up to 20 years of age with regard to health and nutritional status.
• An NIH-sponsored workshop held in 2015 described standardized outcome measures, particularly in the domains of cognition and behavior, for use across future clinical trials ( PMID: 28452584 ). Likewise, robust biomarkers to track disease progression are viewed as essential for designing and developing treatment trials to potentially prevent DS-AD ( PMID: 32506291 ).
• A neurodevelopmental assessment tool, the Arizona Cognitive Test Battery, developed specifically for DS, demonstrated adequate levels of reliability to monitor cognitive changes over time for young participants in clinical trials ( PMID: 28452581 ).
• Feasibility, reliability, and validation of cognitive measures within the NIH Toolbox were assessed for children and young adults with intellectual disability, including DS, leading to refined measures for this population ( PMID: 32094241 ).
• DS-Connect ® : The Down Syndrome Registry, launched in 2013 by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) to enhance recruitment of individuals with DS and their family members for DS research projects, passed the 5,000 participants mark; some of these participants reside outside the United States ( PMID: 26271554 ).

Goals and Objectives: NIH INCLUDE/DS Research Plan

A. basic research.

Our understanding of DS has significantly expanded since 2000, when investigators published the full DNA sequence of chromosome 21. It is now possible to identify all of the genes present in triplicate in those with DS and, ultimately, to understand the effects of having an extra copy of individual genes or clusters of genes. Today, researchers use model systems, tissues, and new technologies to study these effects.

Expand Basic Research Approaches

• Conduct mechanistic studies on the links between chromosome 21 and cognition, including identifying the genes involved in neurodevelopment, developmental signaling pathways, and multiple mechanisms of stress. Sequence the events that lead to abnormal dendritic (neuronal) spine development, including genetic and cellular aspects.
• Use available and new technologies, including neuroimaging, electrophysiology, histopathology, metabolomics, iPSCs, and studies of the microbiome, to define nervous system development and function in DS.
• Define the impact of sex on dysregulation of genetic and cellular mechanisms.
• Expand genetic and epigenetic profiling beyond chromosome 21 to elucidate complex gene-network effects.
• Study pathways that affect mitochondrial function and use genomics, such as interrogating mitochondrial genes and their possible interactions with genes on chromosome 21, to identify dysregulated pathways, including those related to oxidative stress, that may lead to abnormal organ structures.
• Examine the function, development, and differentiation of both B cells and T cells in individuals with DS.
• Research that could lead to standardized phenotyping of the immune system in individuals with DS, including cell functional assessment, the genetics of immune disorders, and the trajectory of dysregulation and disease, such as what trisomy 21 mechanisms may increase the risk and/or severity of autoimmune conditions in people with DS
• Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) to determine whether gene variants predispose people with DS to autoimmune conditions, such as thyroid disease
• Study the cellular mechanisms for and role of inflammation in people with DS, including inflammation present in tissues and organs.
• Study the impact of trisomy 21 on diverse human tissues, using iPSCs, differentiated cells and organoids derived from iPSCs, morphogens, and monolayer cultures.
• Use brain tissue samples to help define the genome, epigenome, metabolome, transcriptome, and proteome in DS.
• Obtain microbiome (gut, oral) data from people with DS to help understand the potential associations of the microbiome to commonly co-occurring conditions in DS.
• Explore the role of inherited genomic variation in DS across different age groups to improve cancer screening, diagnosis, and stratification for treatment, particularly for children. 
• Determine whether there are genetic variants that modulate the impact of leukemogenic genes on chromosome 21 to help define the risk of developing hematological disorders, such as leukemia.
• Study the genetic and non-genetic risk factors for health conditions related to vision in people with DS, and whether there are predisposing risk factors for these conditions that can be identified during pregnancy.
• Study the mechanisms by which trisomy 21 increases susceptibility to and/or severity of infectious diseases in people with DS, such as whether any specific genes or signaling pathways may be implicated.
• Study the mechanisms by which trisomy 21 increases the risk for different types of diabetes, such as whether any specific genes or signaling pathways may be implicated; obtain lipidomic and other ‘omics data to understand risk of diabetes and obesity in people with DS.
• Study the impact of dysregulation of pathways/hormonal circuits that regulate weight, energy metabolism, and appetite control.
• Obtain metabolomics data, both general and tissue-specific, to establish metabolic phenotypes and discover new biomarkers of metabolic disease.
• Define the role of trisomy 21 on metabolic pathways that may modulate the onset and severity of musculoskeletal conditions, such as arthritis.
• Explore molecular and cellular bases for resilience versus the susceptibility of premature aging in DS.
• Create an integrated dataset by combining genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics data to advance understanding of the fundamental biology of DS.

Expand Basic Research on Alzheimer’s Disease in Down Syndrome (DS-AD)

• Define epigenetic changes and hormonal changes across the lifespan in models of DS-AD to help standardize clinical and genetic phenotyping.
• Define DS-AD risk alleles and compare them to those for sporadic AD.
• Develop models of the genetic basis, mechanisms, and significance of dysregulated endosomes, exosomes, autophagosomes, and proteostasis in aging and DS-AD.
• Elucidate conformation and toxic mechanisms of aggregating proteins, such as beta-amyloid and tau, from human tissue in DS-AD.
• Create and compare models to assess the impact of other human chromosome 21 genes on aging and DS-AD.
• Define differences and similarities between models of DS-AD versus late-onset AD and early onset, familial AD.
• Explore the effects and mechanisms of amyloid angiopathy and breach of the blood-brain barrier in DS-AD.
• Explore the role of the microbiome on AD pathology in DS.

Develop Model Systems for DS-AD Research

• Conduct comprehensive ’omics studies of aging and AD in a wide range of models, including yeast, worm, fly, zebrafish, mouse, rat, non-human primate (NHP), and human cell models.
• Examine telomeric length and regulation in mouse models versus human cell lines.
• Define age-related changes in neurons, glial, and endothelial cells in mouse and human models.
• Define the role of age-related hormonal changes on DS-AD endotypes and phenotypes in mouse models.
• Study the origins and consequences of autoimmune conditions in a mouse model of DS.
• Define in vivo mechanisms in model systems that reflect clinical phenotypes in DS, particularly prenatal developmental studies that cannot be conducted in humans.
• Define and compare genetics, mechanisms, and significance of dysregulated endosomes, exosomes, autophagosomes, and proteostasis in DS animal models.
• Conduct research in a model of inducible silencing of the entire chromosome 21, or of specific genes on chromosome 21. 
• Continue to analyze synaptic function in a DS mouse model, focusing specifically on relevant genes also located on human chromosome 21.
• Complete comparative phenotyping, including aging and lifespan of all DS mouse models, to inform the development of phenotypes in people with DS.

Program Portrait 1: Basic Research

Brain Development in DS

Basic biomedical research aims to uncover and understand mechanisms involved in typical development and function and in diseases and conditions such as DS. By examining developmental and other changes associated with DS, researchers hope to identify new ways to improve health and quality of life for people with this condition. Multiple NIH ICOs support basic research on DS, reflecting its effects on multiple organ systems across the lifespan.

For example, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) supports research to understand mechanisms of brain development in DS that lead to intellectual disability, as well as the longer term effects on cognition. In one recent study, researchers used a multidisciplinary approach to show that a defect in the integrated stress response (ISR), a signaling pathway that controls the balance of protein production and destruction inside cells, contributes to cognitive impairment and altered neuronal function in a mouse model of DS. Experimentally suppressing the ISR improved measures of long-term memory in the mice, suggesting that this signaling pathway may be a promising therapeutic target ( PMID: 31727829 ; funded by NINDS, the National Human Genome Research Institute, and the National Cancer Institute).

In another study, researchers sought to understand the mechanisms behind the imbalance of inhibitory and excitatory brain activity observed in people with DS, and if and how this imbalance may contribute to intellectual disability. By studying iPSCs from people with DS, they found that increased expression of the OLIG2 gene leads to excess production of specific types of inhibitory neurons during early brain development. Decreasing the expression of Olig2 reduced this overproduction and improved behavioral deficits in mice, pointing to another possible strategy for future therapies ( PMID: 31130512 ; funded by NINDS, NICHD, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, the National Center for Advancing Translational Science, and the National Institute on Drug Abuse).

B. Cohort Development/Epidemiology

To perform studies in people with DS, researchers need groups—called cohorts—with enough people and information to appropriately inform the research. Developing these cohorts of people with DS is essential to following individuals’ development over time and performing deep phenotyping and natural history studies. For example, a map that includes comprehensive genomic, epigenomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic information will help scientists understand the predisposing risk and protective factors that underlie the highly penetrant features, those that are very common, in DS. Enrolling a cross-sectional cohort of individuals with DS—people of different ages, sexes, races, and ethnicities across the lifespan—will capture the broadest array of phenotypes and ages of onset for the co-occurring conditions, and will identify the critical windows for interventions. Longitudinal demographic and epidemiological studies will improve understanding of these co-occurring conditions in individuals over time and provide the basis for developing long-term social and health care policies for these individuals. Moreover, many of these co-occurring conditions also are common in people who do not have DS; therefore, findings from DS research will have implications for the health of the overall population.

Develop a Cohort(s) for DS Research

• Develop a cohort of individuals with DS across the lifespan, including older individuals (such as those born 1970 to 1990), and those from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, cultures, and geographic areas, ensuring representation across all age, sex, and racial/ethnic population groups.
• Define the impact of race and ethnicity on trisomy 21, specifically addressing whether DS has a disparate impact on particular racial or ethnic populations. Include partial trisomy and mosaic DS cohorts in these studies, and acknowledge the wide variability in phenotypes among individuals with DS.
• Collect GWAS data on a subgroup—one large enough to provide statistical adequate power—of participants with DS from larger efforts, such as DS-Connect ® : The DS Registry (see Program Portrait 2 ) or NIH’s All of Us research program, to develop valid genotypes and phenotypes.
• Conduct research on the health impact of low socioeconomic status and other social determinants of health in DS.
• Link cohorts to a sufficiently large number of biological samples (e.g., blood, hair, saliva) from people with DS through a federation of coordinated biobanks to allow detailed, longitudinal characterization (phenotyping) of individuals with DS. To achieve this goal, consider linking to existing cohorts, including those maintained internationally.

Conduct Longitudinal/Prevalence Studies of Co-Occurring Conditions in DS

• Expand longitudinal studies of the natural history of aging and DS-AD, beginning early in life. Conduct epidemiological studies of adults with DS to identify the onset and trajectories of co-occurring conditions and mortality related to AD, and ascertain the distribution, demographics, and survival rates of DS-AD, including complications of AD that may contribute to mortality (such as pneumonia). Examine the gender, race, and ethnic differences in DS-AD onset and progression. 
• Examine environmental and behavioral factors (e.g., education, work, home settings) and risk factors (e.g., lifestyle, diet, exercise, sleep, substance use) to better understand the impact on cognition and body system function, including cardiovascular health.
• Chart the trajectory of sex differences and co-occurring conditions on the health of people with DS over time.
• Develop diverse cohorts for identifying and validating plasma biomarkers. 
• Include assessments of cognitive, functional and motor skills (including executive function), speech/language and hearing, and behaviors (including validated methods to measure adaptive behaviors and successful independence) in conjunction with imaging and genetic biomarkers in longitudinal natural history studies.
• Examine the prevalence of neurological and psychological conditions in people with DS across the lifespan [1] , including identification of variations by race/ethnicity, sex, and/or geography. Collect data on ADHD and Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD); mental health disorders, such as depression, anxiety, and regression; and sleep/circadian rhythm patterns, including the impact of sleep disturbances on learning and cognition, in longitudinal studies of children with DS.
• Obtain data on the neurodevelopmental trajectories of individuals with DS.
• Conduct longitudinal studies to ascertain the prevalence of cardiovascular conditions in people with DS across the lifespan [2] , and to understand the effects of aging and co-occurring conditions on the cardiovascular system, including evaluation of sex, race, and ethnic differences. Collect epidemiological data to identify potential protective and risk factors for heart disease (such as physical activity) throughout the lifespan, with the goal of informing best practices for treatment.
• Conduct studies to ascertain the prevalence of thyroid disorders in people with DS across the lifespan [3] and whether there are variations by age, race, ethnicity, sex, or geography.
• Study the prevalence of pulmonary conditions in people with DS across the lifespan [4] , including differences by race/ethnicity, sex, and geography; risk and protective factors; and long-term impact on health and well-being.
• Establish the prevalence of and risk factors for thromboembolic and hemorrhagic stroke in people with DS across the lifespan.
• Determine the prevalence of conditions affecting the eyes and/or vision in people with DS across the lifespan. [5]
• Conduct studies to ascertain the prevalence of ear, nose, and throat conditions in people with DS across the lifespan. [6]
• Study oral and dental development, such as the eruption sequence of teeth, speech, language, and auditory development, and risk factors for dental caries and oral inflammation in people with DS.
• Conduct epidemiological research on the prevalence of cancers, including leukemias, in people with DS across the lifespan and particularly in childhood [7] , and the survivability of these cancers as compared to the general population. Characterize neurocognitive, behavioral, and quality-of-life outcomes related to cancer therapy in people with DS, continuing through survivorship, to identify risk factors for poorer outcomes and targets for interventions.
• Conduct research to establish the prevalence of gut/gastrointestinal as well as liver/kidney/bladder conditions in people with DS across the lifespan [8] , including identification of variations by age, race/ethnicity, sex, or geography. Conduct a longitudinal cohort study of dysphagia in children with DS.
• Conduct epidemiological research to establish the prevalence of skin conditions in people with DS across the lifespan. [9]
• Conduct natural history studies of musculoskeletal conditions in people with DS across the lifespan. [10]
• Conduct definitive epidemiological studies to establish the prevalence of diabetes in people with DS across the lifespan [11] , including identification of protective and risk factors for these conditions.
• Compile data on the etiology and timing of metabolic/weight status changes in people with DS across the lifespan and the prevalence of secondary conditions associated with obesity.
• Study how the immune system matures in individuals with DS from infancy through adulthood, and how the process might differ from the same maturation process in those without DS. Conduct longitudinal studies to map the immune system, incorporating inflammatory markers, susceptibility to infections, and responses to vaccines.
• Study COVID-19 risk and mitigation strategies for people with DS, including differential effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on people with DS across the lifespan, in various living settings. Conduct tailored studies of effective dosing and immune response to vaccines to prevent COVID-19 in people with DS.

Program Portrait 2: Cohort Development

DS-Connect ® : The DS Registry

To augment research on DS, NICHD launched DS-Connect ® : The DS Registry in 2013. This research registry, a collaboration among self-advocates, families, DS organizations and foundations, and NIH ICOs within the DS Consortium (see Appendix A: NIH-Led DS Groups ), aims to facilitate information sharing among persons with DS, families, healthcare and service providers, and researchers by collecting demographic and health information about people with DS through a series of online surveys. This confidential, secure, and responsive website was translated into Spanish in 2019. As of 2021, nearly 5,100 individuals with DS were registered.

The DS-Connect ® professional portal launched in 2014 to allow approved investigators, clinicians, and other qualified professionals to access the de-identified data collected through the registry. The professional portal offers three levels of access: 1) viewing aggregate, de-identified data or survey content only; 2) performing customized searches or statistical evaluation for analysis, publication, or presentation; and 3) working through the registry coordinator to recruit participants for research or clinical studies. As of 2021, more than 532 researchers had professional accounts.

Researchers have used registry data to develop studies on the etiology, natural history, and treatments for DS and associated conditions; recognize trends in health characteristics and identify medical needs of those living with DS; and determine feasibility and other features of research studies involving those with DS. The DS-Connect ® Research Review Committee approves access and use of the registry data by investigators to recruit for studies and surveys. As of 2021, researchers successfully used the registry to recruit participants for over 60 clinical trials and research studies, including 9 funded under the INCLUDE Project.

The registry is also facilitating linkages with other research studies, using special codes and identifiers, to allow the INCLUDE Project to build a large, virtual DS cohort, which helps to achieve the goal of assembling a large study population of individuals with DS. This resource, called the INCLUDE Data Coordinating Center Data Hub , will also help researchers understand factors that may contribute to differential survival and co-occurring condition rates among different groups.

C. Clinical Research/Co-Occurring Conditions

At least one-half of all children with DS also have a co-occurring health condition that can contribute to intellectual, developmental, and physical problems. For example, leukemia and CHD during early childhood have the potential to significantly affect cognitive function and overall health status later in life, and both necessitate extensive medical intervention. Within the context of DS, determining the optimal windows for early therapeutics for individuals with DS presents an ongoing challenge for researchers, as does establishing the optimal doses of off-label and new therapeutic agents for this population. Studies of daily environments, such as those structured to facilitate specific language interventions for children with DS, may also provide information that helps researchers design biobehavioral interventions for improving cognition and daily-life functioning. Ultimately, this research will provide the evidence base for informing and expanding current clinical care guidelines established by the professional medical and behavioral societies for all age groups of people with DS.

Define DS Phenotypes

• Convene a panel of experts (including both clinicians and researchers) on DS to define DS phenotypes across the lifespan using available clinical and genetic data. Inform the development of updated clinical guidelines to improve care for people with DS by incorporating data on changes related to stages of life (e.g., inflammation and metabolism), and on age ranges when interventions for co-occurring conditions might be most effective. 
• Identify DS phenotypes and genotype-phenotype associations, including behavioral and developmental milestones, to inform understanding of: the natural history of DS, beginning prenatally and including puberty and adulthood; the timing of and targets for interventions to improve cognition or intervene in regression; the evolution of communication skills; and pathologies that affect hearing, balance, and vision.
• Explore differences in utero to ascertain why spontaneous fetal loss occurs only in some cases of trisomy 21, whether the placenta can provide insights on these pregnancy losses, and when the aging process begins.

Improve Clinical Research and Therapeutics for Co-Occurring Conditions

• Leverage the unique opportunities that come from prenatal screening for DS as part of routine prenatal care, and understand the role of the placenta in the developing fetus. For example, identifying fetuses with DS in continuing pregnancies creates the possibility of offering prenatal treatment(s) to the pregnant woman to minimize certain aspects of the syndrome, such as CHD. Following these pregnancies could also provide new ways to study antenatal influences, including placental function, on fetal development.
• Conduct brain-related research to determine the anatomical and morphological impacts of trisomy 21, such as relative size of different brain regions, plasticity, synaptic pruning, myelination, and glial and neuronal function.
• Apply findings about early infant/childhood development to fetuses, infants, and children with DS. Tailor newly developed behavioral interventions for typically developing infants for infants with DS to take advantage of brain plasticity during early development.
• Increase the number of individuals with DS in controlled clinical trials of experimental therapeutics and medical devices meant for the general population, taking into account differences in drug metabolism (pharmacokinetics [PK] and pharmacodynamics [PD]) to establish drug safety, efficacy, and dosing in people with DS, and evaluate differential side effects (such as changes in toxicity). Support additional clinical research in people with DS to tailor dosing and fit of therapeutics and medical devices that are already available to the public. Collect data on the relative efficacy, side effects, and interactions of therapeutics in those with DS when multiple co-occurring conditions are being treated simultaneously.
• Conduct clinical research to assess the efficacy of interventions for improved cognition, communication, hearing and balance, and vision.
• Include people with DS in clinical trials of vaccines and treatments, including COVID-19 vaccines, as they become available.
• Include people with DS and their caregivers/supporters throughout the clinical research process, beginning with study design, and develop strategies to increase the participation of people with DS of different age, sex, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status in research.
• Consider developing public-private partnerships with biotechnology companies/pharmaceutical industry to test specific therapeutics for certain aspects of DS in people with DS.
• Harmonize clinical trial protocols, when possible, with international efforts to enable meaningful data sharing. Develop sustainable diagnostic protocols and early intervention procedures that could be used in low- and middle-income countries.

Expand Research To Understand the Impact of Common Co-Occurring Medical Conditions in DS on Cognition and Overall Health Outcomes

Note: Co-occurring conditions appear in italics in the following list.

• Examine co-occurring neuropsychiatric conditions, such as ADHD, ASD, depression, and developmental regression, by studying gene-brain-behavior connections, the effects of early interventions, and their long-term health effects. Study the psychological effects of untreated co-occurring conditions (such as skin problems) in people with DS.
• Study how a traumatic life change, change in health status, or event perceived as traumatic by a person with DS may affect mental health in people with DS. Conduct research on the effects of disaster/trauma (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) on people with DS, including loss of educational interventions, reduction in physical activity, and limits on social interactions, independence, and routine. Tailor existing therapeutic treatments for traumatic stress to the specific needs of people with DS. 
• Define how early medical or behavioral interventions for leukemias alter the developmental trajectory in children with DS. Improve assessment and management of side effects experienced by people with DS during treatment (such as pain/nausea). Continue to refine treatments for leukemias in children with DS, including both chemotherapeutic agents and non-chemotherapy approaches.
• Compare markers in biological samples from individuals with cancer , both with and without DS, to look at tumor specificity and biological signatures in cancers. Study cancer subtypes in people with DS and in people who do not have DS.
• Characterize congenital heart conditions and cardiac function in individuals with DS, as well as the effects of various medical management approaches (including the risk of anesthesia for surgery), and examine the impact of differences in cardiovascular function, immune response, and hypertension across the lifespan, including factors that may protect from atherosclerotic disease. Study neurodevelopmental outcomes among the large proportion of children with DS born with congenital heart conditions; these outcomes may vary even among children with DS who have the same heart defects and receive the same treatments as typically developing children.
• Study immune system differences in, and risk factors and potential treatments for, co-occurring autoimmune conditions most common in people with DS [12] , and define the full impact of autoimmunity on the health of people with DS, including possible autoimmune-related etiologies for other co-occurring conditions. Study whether treatment of autoimmune skin conditions may address other co-occurring autoimmune conditions. Conduct research to determine whether, in people with DS, having one autoimmune disorder predisposes them to other autoimmune conditions, and how this susceptibility may differ from that of individuals without DS who have autoimmunity.
• Describe more fully mitochondrial dysfunction in DS, and develop targeted therapies to address it. Study how failed mitochondrial function and related oxidative stress impact muscle physiology and the relationship between neurologic function, cognitive deficits, and AD.
• Conduct research on the long-term health impact of various types of diabetes , including whether having type 1 diabetes increases the chance of developing other autoimmune conditions, and whether early treatment of type 2 diabetes can reduce longer-term health issues, such as heart disease, stroke, vision problems, neuropathy, and kidney disease. 
• Study the long-term health effects of obesity in people with DS, including: consideration of sex, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status; what interventions (such as diet and exercise) might assist in management; and why lipid levels in people with DS with obesity are often within a normal range.
• Study nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in people with DS to understand how liver dysfunction may contribute to other co-occurring conditions.
• Conduct research on nutrient absorption and metabolism in people with DS (sometimes called the gut-brain axis) to understand preventive and risk factors for celiac disease and related disorders.
• Conduct studies to determine more precisely the thyroid-stimulating hormone level at which hypothyroidism manifests; develop treatments for thyroid disorders in addition to standard thyroid hormone management.
• Study differential response to types of infections [13] , as well as risk factors and potential treatments, for individuals with DS, including antibiotics, antiviral medications, preventatives (such as palivizumab for Respiratory Syncytial Virus [RSV] pneumonia), and vaccines. Study how infectious diseases may influence overall health, longevity, and quality of life of people with DS.
• Study the long-term impact of hematological disorders and their treatments on the health and development of people with DS.
• Study the long-term health impact of epilepsy and seizure disorders and their treatments for people with DS, including their role in AD progression.
• Study moyamoya disease to improve early detection, develop biomarkers for the condition, and determine risk of stroke associated with the disease.
• Study hypotonia and its role in muscle physiology and motor development, including oromotor function and development.
• Study musculoskeletal dysfunction in people with DS, and identify fracture risk factors specific to DS, including the predictive role and value of measures of bone quality/density.
• Evaluate corneal structure in those with DS and determine the integrity of the retinal structure.
• Map the time course for the development of refractive error.
• Evaluate visual neural processing over the course of childhood development.
• Study Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) and other sleep-related disorders (e.g., circadian disturbances, insomnia), the long-term health and metabolic consequences associated with these disorders, and the feasibility and validation of at-home diagnostic tools such as sleep apnea testing, actigraphy, and other wearable technologies; study the efficacy of treatments, such as medications, CPAP, and surgical approaches, including tonsillectomy, adenoidectomy, and hypoglossal nerve stimulator insertion.
• Conduct research on craniofacial growth and upper airway development to help identify types of airway abnormalities in people with DS that may cause aspiration (including microaspiration from reflux), dysphagia, swallowing dysfunction, apnea, and other problems.
• Study pulmonary hypertension in people with DS, including etiology, management, and treatments.
• Examine the impact of dental and oral health/periodontal disease in people with DS on cognition and development, sleep, the immune system, and synergies with common co-occurring conditions, such as potential linkages between hypodontia/microdontia and hypothyroidism.
• Assess the biomechanical and kinematic properties of the vocal tract to develop more complete information on speech physiology in DS. Conduct research on dysmorphologies of the craniofacial and laryngeal structures and motor speech impairments to develop clinical assessments and treatments and improve speech intelligibility.
• Develop preventive measures and treatments to address structural and functional abnormalities in the auditory and vestibular systems of people with DS over the lifespan to optimize hearing and balance .
• Develop intervention strategies using non-pharmacological approaches to manage concurrent co-occurring conditions; such approaches could include technologies to stimulate brain function, dietary interventions to manage type 2 diabetes and similar conditions, and behavioral therapy strategies, such as social engagement, physical activity, educational inclusion, applied behavior analysis, and others to enhance cognition and behavior. Create the evidence base for such interventions, particularly behavior analytic ones, to address domains of development, such as communication, cognition, motor, self-care, and challenging behaviors and to promote inclusion in educational, employment, community, and social settings from infancy through adulthood. Evaluate non-pharmacologic approaches in individuals with DS-AD, for both improving cognitive function and/or preventing cognitive deterioration.

Program Portrait 3: Clinical Research/Co-Occurring Conditions

Congenital Heart Disease (CHD) Research Conducted by INCLUDE Scholars

The Pediatric Heart Network (PHN) , sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), is helping to achieve a primary goal of the INCLUDE project—fostering future generations of DS researchers. The PHN is a multicenter research enterprise that conducts clinical trials and other clinical research on CHD. Because approximately 50 percent of children with DS are born with CHD, the PHN was a natural home for a program focused on bolstering young investigators interested in pursuing research on DS. With support from the INCLUDE Project in 2019, this NHLBI-led effort conducted a competitive process to fund six INCLUDE Scholars who have conducted research related to DS and the cardiovascular system. Their projects cover a wide age span and include assessment of neurocognitive outcomes, long-term survival, and outcomes of surgery for CHD. 

Another project, studying vascular health and risk factors, is premised on the fact that life expectancy among individuals with DS is increasing over historical estimates, and that cardiovascular morbidity and mortality are becoming more common as people with DS get older. The investigators are evaluating risk factors, including obesity, blood lipid abnormalities, and other metabolic issues, for future cardiovascular disease in both children and adolescents with DS. Project researchers will use sophisticated, non-invasive measures of vascular health to compare cardiovascular outcomes of individuals with DS with those who do not have DS. This study recently leveraged funding from the INCLUDE Project to attract additional support. 

D. Living and Aging with DS/Services Research

Research studies that benefit the daily lives of people with DS and their families, such as those that inform lifestyle choices and independent living, are a high priority. People with DS are living longer than they were even a few decades ago, and this lengthier lifespan poses many new research questions and opportunities for people with and without the condition. For example, people with DS are at higher risk for developing AD than the general population, and they often develop it at younger ages than those without DS; efforts to discover new treatments for DS-AD may also benefit those with AD who do not have DS.

Enhance Quality of Life

• Conduct research on the efficacy of lifestyle interventions for people with DS across the lifespan to promote healthy behaviors, modulate conditions, such as inflammatory bowel disease or gastroesophageal reflux disease, and/or delay the onset of DS-AD; these approaches may include exercise, diet, dietary supplements, behavioral interventions, and use of technologies.
• Develop applications for mobile devices and computer-based therapies to increase independence for people with DS in activities of daily living, especially self-support technologies, for use in telehealth, home-based, and school settings to improve learning and communication. Develop and/or adapt assistive devices, such as Global Positioning Systems and mobile devices for transportation, or devices that help to facilitate integration of an individual with DS into the workplace, residential or home environment, and community. 
• Evaluate the benefits of Augmentative and Alternative Communication to foster communication in people with DS, and develop and validate other tools and interventions aimed at improving language skills and hearing capabilities in those with DS, such as strategies to overcome difficulties in speech intelligibility and literacy. 
• Evaluate the benefits of speech supplementation techniques (e.g., gestures, symbols) at different points across the lifespan to foster communicability in people with DS. Identify effective interventions and educational strategies, including the role of learning sign language early in life, to help children with DS process available linguistic input and enhance their communication skills, with the goal of matching children to the therapies best suited to their profiles. Determine the possible influences of race, ethnicity, and culture on language development in children with DS. 
• Continue to conduct research on optimal educational methods for children with DS, mechanisms to support the transition from high school to adulthood, and development of functional and job skills, with the recognition that education, literacy, and academics facilitate success in post-secondary education and employment.  
• Examine cohorts of younger to older age adults with DS to develop a model of life-stage transitions among adults to aid with planning for changes in autonomy, employment, retirement, and social and family engagement.
• Comparative models of care to explore support factors and mitigation strategies to identify best practices in supporting adults with DS experiencing mild cognitive impairment or in the early stages of dementia
• Current practices of supporting adults with advanced dementia and comparative studies of which models and practices best mitigate advanced-stage-dementia related pain, decline, loss of function, and medical conditions and provide for the highest degree of comfort and quality of care
• Identifying the factors that lead to effective functioning or challenges in families that include an individual with DS
• Understanding the impact on the family, including the individual with DS, as that person leaves the school system
• Researching the physical and mental health and lifespans of the parents, siblings, and other caregivers, as well as the effectiveness and validity of support-staging models of decision-making among caregivers of adults with DS-AD with application to family counseling and design of services
• Examining the personal and social support networks of middle-age and older adults with DS and the elements of these networks that contribute to continued function, autonomy, and quality of life
• Study the impact of behavior problems and psychiatric disorders on the daily functioning, socialization, academics, and quality of life of people with DS.
• Develop tools to foster coping skills among people with DS during periods of grief/loss and disruption of routine, including accessible materials and other resources for managing depression and anxiety. 
• Use lessons learned from families’ experiences with the SARS-COV-2 pandemic to develop strategies that include people with DS in planning for future public health and disaster preparedness efforts, such as maintaining caregiver access to individuals with DS who may be isolated in the hospital.

Increase Inclusion of People with DS in Research Across the Lifespan

• Take into account, when designing specific research studies, how potential participants view themselves (including identities of race, ethnicity, gender, class, and sexual orientation) and, to the extent feasible, recruit diverse populations of people with DS across the lifespan into research studies.
• Develop research study materials that are accessible to individuals with DS, including study descriptions, informed consent/assent documents/methods, and information on confidentiality and privacy of data. Engage people with DS and their caregivers in study design to increase the appropriateness of these materials and ensure that the presentation of research topics and results does not unintentionally cause psychological stress in potential participants. 
• Encourage researchers to participate in DS-related outreach efforts to share the latest information and help inform individuals with DS and their families about research progress, thus encouraging additional participation in studies. Foster additional efforts to educate caregivers of people with DS about the value of participating in research.
• Working with the DS Consortium and DS-Connect ® team, explore a variety of dissemination methods for reaching healthcare providers with information about recent research findings in DS. In particular, develop and disseminate evidence-based educational materials regarding management of co-occurring conditions in DS. Encourage NIH to incorporate people with DS in its overall health education efforts.
• Consider mapping research studies to the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Framework to ensure appropriate inclusion of the effects of social determinants of health.
• Study the cross-cultural and linguistically diverse needs of people with DS and apply the findings to education and recruitment efforts to ensure equitable access and optimize retention. Develop and promote interventions that are culturally responsive to the needs of diverse individuals and groups.

Expand Knowledge on DS, Aging, and DS-AD

• Factors that affect the risk of dementia
• Differential impact of aging on organ systems in people with DS, such as changes in bone mass and chronic inflammatory conditions
• Support research on variations in aging patterns, including consideration of lifestyle factors, among subpopulations of people with DS.
• Explore potential protective factors for age-related dementia, including complementary and integrative health approaches, cognitive stimulation and social engagement, exercise and weight management, and nutrition and dietary practices.
• Study the specific impact of postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) use by women with DS to determine if it reduces the cumulative risk for DS-AD, and if so, identify the optimal time and duration for postmenopausal HRT use in this population.
• Study how the aging process, dual diagnosis of DS and another condition (such as ASD), or mosaicism affects the progression of chronic conditions or infection.
• Explore the impact of having type 2 diabetes on the development of DS-AD.
• Study the relationship between changes in sleep, behavior, cognition, and biomarkers for DS-AD.
• Examine the impact of caring for people with DS as they age by considering the needs of caregivers in study design. Study the health impact on individuals with DS if their caregiver has a significant health issue or dies.
• Study long-term care options and end-of-life decision-making for older individuals with DS.

Program Portrait 4: Living and Aging with DS

Alzheimer’s Biomarker Consortium-Down Syndrome (ABC-DS) Project

Adults with DS are at high risk for developing AD. Virtually all adults with DS have neuropathological changes consistent with AD by age 40, including deposits of amyloid-beta (Aβ) in diffuse and neuritic plaques, and most will develop clinical dementia by their late 60s. The high risk for DS-AD has been attributed, at least in part, to triplication and overexpression of the gene for APP on chromosome 21, leading to elevated levels of Aβ peptides. The wide variation in age at onset of dementia among those with DS, ranging from younger than 40 years to older than 70 years of age, suggests that additional genetic, biological, and environmental factors modify the rate and degree of Aβ deposition or clearance, and that these factors may be important modifiers of risk, accelerating or slowing disease progression. Development of empirically supported methods for early diagnosis of dementia in DS, biological characterization of the preclinical and early phases of DS-AD, and identification of risk factors for AD progression are critical to the early diagnosis of dementia and for the development of effective interventions and treatments.

ABC-DS is a multidisciplinary, multisite longitudinal study examining biomarkers of DS-AD in a large cohort of adults with DS, age 25 and older. The National Institute on Aging (NIA) and the NICHD initiated ABC-DS in 2015 by funding two groups of research collaborators—Neurodegeneration in Aging Down Syndrome (NiAD, U01AG051406) and Alzheimer’s Disease in Down Syndrome (ADDS, U01AG051412). In September 2020, the continuation of ABC-DS was funded by the NIA, NICHD, and the INCLUDE Project (U19AG068054) as one combined study.

ABC-DS researchers will follow the cohort of people with DS to conduct three projects:

• Investigate how DS-AD parallels and differs from sporadic AD within an amyloid, tau, neurodegeneration framework, and identify modifiers of risk of conversion/progression.
• Identify genetic modifiers of the development of DS-AD.
• Translate outcomes to a precision medicine framework and expedite clinical trials. 

Importantly, the next iteration of ABC-DS includes an emphasis on increasing the diversity of individuals in the cohort of adults with DS. The AD/DS Outreach, Recruitment, and Engagement Core will help rapidly disseminate information to DS communities and engage underrepresented groups. 

E. Research Infrastructure and Tools

Diagnostic and screening measures used for DS and related conditions have continued to evolve in recent years. However, utilization of more specialized measures of function across domains could facilitate more refined phenotyping and identification of biomarkers for medical, cognitive, and behavioral features related to DS.

In the near term, the scientific community needs to further improve tools, techniques, methods, and measures to move toward a minimum set of common measures for use across studies, age groups, and developmental and behavioral domains. The field may benefit from a consensus on common domains and on a core set of standardized tests and measures for use in clinical research on DS to allow for comparability across studies, noting that domains appropriate for one stage of life may not be appropriate for others. In addition, making common research resources available to researchers, such as new models for DS, research infrastructure, and data and tissue repositories, will allow research to move forward more rapidly.

Expand Research Tools

• Develop additional new model systems for studying DS at the cellular, organ (in addition to brain), and genetic levels.
• Study the effects of perturbation of individual chromosome 21 genes on the differentiation and maturation of neurons, glia, and synapses in brain organoids, as well as in model organisms such as C. elegans and Drosophila .
• Develop and support new animal (i.e., mouse, rat, or NHP) models for conducting preclinical research on DS, including testing pharmacological and genetic interventions, and conducting anatomical and behavioral analyses of brain development. NHP models, such as marmosets, have the potential to shed light on social behaviors, cognition, and communication that murine models cannot replicate. Prioritize the development of models that minimize changes to non-chromosome 21-equivalent genes, and those that can reflect the structural changes in the human brain and immune system without introducing extraneous genetic material. 
• Develop and support new human cellular/organoid cultures for conducting preclinical research on DS.
• Design new treatment paradigms and pathways for testing pharmaceuticals in DS mouse models (specifically, dose-response and toxicity studies).
• Develop nanotechnology and other small-molecule approaches to enhance contrast of amyloid imaging reagents for finer resolution studies in younger individuals with DS.
• Develop human DS cellular models (e.g., iPSCs differentiated into neuronal cultures) to study variations by sex and ancestry.
• Use both in vivo and in vitro model systems to study cardiovascular function and therapy response.
• Refine outcome measures that are already validated in people with DS, and disseminate these outcome measures to the research community. Emphasize measures that have demonstrable clinical utility, such as identifying changes in language, behavior, cognition, or adaptive skills. Build on the NIH Toolbox Cognitive Battery to develop or adapt additional outcome measures for studying people with DS who are low functioning, very young, or adolescents. Track outcomes during early development to allow evaluation of the impact of interventions at different life stages. 
• Link cognitive phenotypes of DS to validated developmental measures, including speech and language, auditory function, behavioral, and psychological abnormalities. Use Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), functional MRI (fMRI), diffusion-tensor imaging (DTI), and other emerging imaging modalities in conjunction with specific neurocognitive assessment measurements to examine major pathways and determine how those pathways differ in persons with DS. For example, this research could address the correlation among cognitive function/language impairment/behavior issues in individuals with DS and co-occurring ASD.
• Develop biomarkers and other assessment tools to diagnose and analyze developmental delays and cognitive impairments (including dementia) that also permit tracking the effectiveness of early interventions. Specifically, identify the clinical, cognitive, genetic, and biochemical biomarkers of DS-AD for use in detection and management of disease progression. Develop or improve methods to detect mild cognitive impairment in DS to aid in the early diagnosis of DS-AD. Validate these tools for use in clinical settings.
• Develop diagnostic/screening tools and biomarkers for autoimmune conditions in people with DS, including celiac disease and arthropathy, prior to the development of symptoms.
• Assess how asthma diagnostic criteria and screening tools should be applied to individuals with DS.
• Develop screening tools and biomarkers for infectious diseases that occur more commonly in people with DS (e.g., pneumonia).
• Conduct research to identify new biomarkers for hypothyroidism in addition to antithyroid antibodies in people with DS.
• Develop screening tools for depression, anxiety, and other co-occurring mental health conditions in people with DS. 
• Develop diagnostic and screening tools for hematologic disorders in people with DS to permit tailored treatments.
• Refine the diagnostic and screening tools for vision-related conditions in people with DS.
• Develop or improve methods to assess auditory and vestibular function over the lifespan of people with DS for use in screening during routine health examinations.
• Refine the diagnostic and screening tools for type 1 diabetes in people with DS.
• Assess the value of and develop additional screening tools and technologies (such as wearables) for OSA in people with DS to improve diagnosis without the necessity of sleep studies in medical facilities.
• Facilitate collaboration between neuropathologists and DS clinicians to assess the usefulness of current model systems and biomarkers for DS neurobiology. 
• Develop functional intervention models that address behavioral and psychological symptoms. Use neurocognitive tools and brain imaging technologies (i.e., MRI, fMRI, DTI, electroencephalogram) to link neurocognitive performance and health status in people with DS with underlying brain structure. 

Improve Research Infrastructure

• Increase public awareness of and registration in DS-Connect ® : The DS Registry. Relay personal experiences from the DS community, such as through videos and other outreach methods describing why individuals have chosen to participate in research, and explaining how research has impacted their lives.
• Set up a family-to-family outreach effort allowing families who are already enrolled in the DS-Connect ® registry to explain to others why they joined and raise awareness about opportunities to participate in research.
• Ensure that participants receive the overall study results from any research projects in which they participated, in accessible language.
• Expand the DS-Connect ® website to promote non-DS-Connect events and articles. Expand and update the DS-Connect ® and/or the NIH DS websites with listings of upcoming clinical trials and treatment guidelines. 
• Work with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to provide information and materials about the DS-Connect ® registry and upcoming research studies that are seeking participants from healthcare organizations that accept Medicaid.
• Work with DS organizations and experienced clinical trial specialists to create accessible and appropriate recruitment materials for DS studies, using language that is easily understandable to people with DS and their families; consider both visual and non-visual materials.
• Study how health care practice may best foster engagement and participation of people with DS in research. Identify ways to foster community-engaged research, collaborating when possible with people with DS, caregivers/supporters, and community partners; use community advisory boards to augment ethical reviews of research by institutional review boards.
• Augment systems for sharing data from published cohorts and make results available in a searchable format, including fostering international data sharing. Establish a publicly available, centralized repository for DS data, either through or in conjunction with the DS-Connect ® registry and the INCLUDE Data Coordinating Center , so that researchers may compare DS-specific data with data on the general population, people with intellectual and developmental disabilities other than DS, siblings of people with DS, and people with AD. Use common datasets and Common Data Elements to ensure standardized collection of phenotypic, clinical, and ‘omics data. Develop training and other support for DS clinics to support digitization of clinical data for submission to a centralized repository/database, and encourage the use of global identifiers that allow data sharing between databases without revealing personally identifiable information.
• Through the INCLUDE Data Coordinating Center, create a large cohort study of individuals with DS across the lifespan to accelerate research into co-occurring conditions. Provide researchers and the broader DS community with access to the cohort data and data mining and analysis tools, and facilitate data sharing and linkages of datasets using unique identifiers that preserve individual confidentiality. Ensure full data sharing with appropriate privacy protections and adherence to the “FAIR” principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) per NIH Data Commons guidelines.
• Support an interdisciplinary team of researchers and clinicians, including the development of new researchers in DS, some of whom may conduct implementation science projects to ensure that the underlying research results benefit the DS community. 
• Encourage non-DS focused basic scientists, research pediatricians, and other medical specialists with experience studying co-occurring conditions to expand their focus to include specific investigations in DS.
• Facilitate enrollment of condition-specific subgroups, age ranges, or underrepresented populations of people with DS into research studies.
• Develop a range of trial designs to enhance reproducibility of data in the DS population, for which sample size may be limited. 
• Linking the DS repository with the NIH NeuroBioBank and the existing ADRC Brain Banks , so that tissue from people with DS can be compared to those obtained from individuals with AD and other disorders  
• Collecting neurotypical control samples
• Expand federally funded research training programs to ensure a vibrant pipeline of researchers doing work in DS, and host scientific workshops that bring emerging investigators together with established scientists in the field for training in clinical trials. 

Program Portrait 5: Research Infrastructure and Tools

Using the Pediatric Trials Network (PTN) to Test Therapeutics in Children with DS

Only a small percentage of drugs and devices approved by the FDA have been labeled for pediatric use. NICHD established the PTN in 2010 to conduct clinical research and collect data to assist the FDA in revising medication labels for safer and more effective use in children. Working with research sites around the country, the PTN studies the formulation, dosing, efficacy, and safety of drugs, as well as medical devices, for use in children. The structure allows the network to address many of the challenges related to conducting clinical trials in children, such as having a limited number of subjects at one site, competing research priorities, and a lack of trained investigators.

Recently, NICHD funded an expansion of the PTN’s trial structure to develop prospective trials to assess the safety and efficacy of therapeutics prescribed for children with DS. The effort—called the PTN PK, PD, and Safety Profile of Understudied Drugs Administered to Children per Standard of Care—will train investigators at a core set of sites on clinical pharmacology-based research and clinical trials in DS to evaluate the PK/PD of drugs administered to children with DS as part of the standard of care. This approach will allow the collection of data in a real-world setting, allowing researchers to understand differences in how children with DS may metabolize drugs, and to evaluate the influence of genetic factors on drug metabolism and efficacy. 

In addition, the PTN is conducting a study in children with DS and with the co-occurring condition, ADHD, called the Guanfacine for Hyperactivity in Children with DS study. Millions of children are affected by ADHD, which is often associated with behavioral problems, learning disabilities, psychiatric conditions, such as depression, and increased risk of injury. However, FDA-approved treatment options for ADHD have been studied almost exclusively in typically developing children. Moreover, clinicians may be using these medications for treatment in DS, but with no data to drive their dosing decisions. Guanfacine is one of the most commonly used medications for treating ADHD, but no PK/PD data exist for its use in children with DS. This prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, in children with DS ages 6 to 12 years, will provide the data needed to determine the safety and efficacy of the treatment in this specific population. 

Conclusion: Emerging Research Opportunities

The field of DS research has undergone some remarkable changes since the last NIH research plan was published in 2014. In that research plan, Down Syndrome Directions , the research objectives were significantly expanded, in comparison to the first DS-specific plan published in 2007, to create a more balanced perspective on the health needs and multiple co-occurring conditions of DS beyond intellectual disability, including the addition of research on DS and aging. Although not all of the 2014 plan’s objectives have been met, researchers and the DS community have made significant progress in DS-related research. For example:

• The development of iPSC and cerebral organoid culture systems and other basic science advances are providing new tools to probe early neurodevelopment; the availability of rapid, efficient gene-editing tools, such as CRISPR/Cas9, have revolutionized researchers’ ability to engineer cellular and animal models.
• Although a few significant, single genes on chromosome 21 are still the subject of intense scrutiny, newer studies take a more nuanced view on the impact of multiple genes across the entire chromosome, as well as the role of genes on other chromosomes and even environmental factors; in fact, many of these studies are incorporating ‘omics technologies to support a systems-biology approach that was not feasible a decade ago.
• Recognition of DS as an “interferonopathy” due to altered immune system regulation is beginning to inform a more complete model of the interplay between the immune system, oxidative stress, bioenergetics, and neurogenesis on cognition and many other aspects of DS.
• Several large cohort studies have provided a better understanding of the pathophysiology of DS-AD ( PMID: 30733618 ), but more recent recognition of a worrisome “regression” phenotype reminds us of how much we have yet to learn about some of the neurological conditions that co-occur with DS.
• The paucity of medication trials tailored to people with DS (with the exception of several exploring the optimal chemotherapy for childhood leukemia in DS, and some failed trials to improve cognition or even prevent dementia) ( PMID: 28884975 ; PMID: 24573065 ) is improving, particularly with support from the INCLUDE Project.

The impact of the INCLUDE Project should not be underestimated; it has infused the field with new funding, brought new investigators into DS research, and encouraged new and “out-of-the-box” approaches to this well-known chromosomal disorder, fundamentally changing the culture of DS research conducted and supported by NIH. The emphasis on support of trainees and junior faculty engaging in DS-related research, through institutional training grant supplements, Clinical and Translational Science Awards training supplements, the PHN Scholars program (see Program Portrait 3 ), and individual fellowship and career development awards, is resulting in new and younger scientists joining the DS research community. The additional focus on transformative research is also encouraging new and established investigators to explore exciting areas of basic science inquiry. All of these measures increase the pool of investigators involved in DS research and fulfill the congressional mandate to “expand the current pipeline of DS research” (see Appendix E: Congressional Directives on DS Research ).

Despite the INCLUDE Project’s recent launch, with the first supplements funded a short time ago, it has still contributed to several specific outcomes and discoveries, as noted in this research plan. In addition, some of the promising DS projects funded through INCLUDE and other NIH sources allow identification of aspirational scientific goals that may lead to exciting discoveries in the future. 

One such aspirational goal is the development and expanded availability of improved rodent models for DS. Another aspirational goal focuses on advancing prenatal treatments to prevent certain aspects of DS, such as cognitive impairment ( PMID  33098770 ), immune disorders, or AD; while more preclinical studies are needed prior to engaging in human trials, the possibilities are intriguing. The concept that an extra copy of a chromosome could be selectively “turned off” or “silenced” in a cell was only recently achieved in a cell culture environment ( PMID: 30518921 ); testing this chromosome silencing in a mouse model of DS to prevent amyloid plaque deposition in the brain and onset of dementia symptoms remains as an aspirational goal that could be a breakthrough not only in the field of DS research, but also for many other conditions.

Community input continues to be a critical aspect of improving treatments for some of the most challenging aspects of DS. Parents often report that poor communication and speech articulation, as well as poor sleep quality, have a major impact not only on the well-being of the person with DS, but also on other family members. The possibility of developmental regression in teens and young adults with DS, and the onset of dementia as people with DS age looms for many families. Developing clinical trials to improve understanding of the causes and range of clinical presentations specifically in people with DS requires consistent and frank engagement between the DS community and researchers, including those who study conditions other than DS. For example, findings from an AD prevention trial that uses an anti-amyloid therapy are of interest within the DS community and the non-DS community alike.

The unique challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic also provide opportunities, such as understanding the heightened risk factors for more severe outcomes in those with DS infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Through supplemental awards and other mechanisms, investigators can learn about the roles played by immune factors in COVID-19 infection, which in turn may help understand risks and resiliencies in in both the DS and general population. The knowledge gained will help all of us prepare for the next pandemic or other emerging health threats that may have a disproportionately negative impact on those with DS.

Perhaps the most important outcome of the previous research plan is the enhanced engagement and partnership with and within the DS community. The NIH commitment to research participation by individuals across the lifespan, including those with intellectual disabilities and DS ( PMID: 29285540 ), is changing the clinical research landscape. All NIH workshops hosted since 2019 (see Appendix D: DS-Research Related Meetings Since 2014 ) have included a voice-of-the-participant, parent, and/or self-advocate perspective in their speaker rosters. These presentations are among the most dynamic and provocative and serve as touchpoints for subsequent discussions.

Inviting a wider range of individuals to engage in clinical research—both as participants and as clinicians leading the studies—is now a cornerstone of NIH efforts, including the PTN studies to understand drug metabolism in children with DS who are already taking medications, and the standalone trial of guanfacine in children with DS and ADHD (see Program Portrait 4 ). Developing a cadre of investigators and clinical trialists who understand the unique needs of the DS population, can develop relevant therapies, and are comfortable proposing new clinical trials to test the therapies in this population is an important step in the inclusion process. Likewise, the more recent emphasis on developing outcome measures and biomarkers to serve as endpoints for clinical trials is paving the way for future trials of interventions for a full range of co-occurring conditions of DS. These efforts underscore the importance of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in our workforce and in the research participants recruited for DS studies.

• Appendix A: NIH-Led DS Groups
• Appendix B: Input into Development of the Revised Plan
• Appendix C: INCLUDE Funding Opportunity Announcements
• Appendix D: DS-Research Related Meetings Since 2014
• Appendix E: Congressional Directives on DS Research
• Appendix F: Training in DS Research
• Appendix G: Bibliography

[1] Could include studies of AD, dementia, ASD, anxiety, ADHD, depression, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, Parkinson’s disease, traumatic brain injury, cerebral palsy, stroke, movement disorder/restless leg syndrome, Moyamoya disease, regression, seizure disorders/infantile spasms/epilepsy, and autoimmune encephalitis. 

[2] Could include studies of CHD, heart arrhythmias, hypertension, cardiomyopathy, high cholesterol, atherosclerosis, atherosclerotic and non-atherosclerotic cardiac ischemia, peripheral artery disease, and myocardial infarction.

[3] Could include studies of hypothyroidism, hyperthyroidism, Grave’s disease, and Hashimoto’s disease.

[4] Could include studies of asthma, reactive airway disease, pulmonary hypertension, and pneumonia.

[5] Could include studies of amblyopia, astigmatism, cataracts, glaucoma, hyperopia, keratoconus, myopia, nystagmus, strabismus, and blocked nasolacrimal duct.

[6] Could include studies of eustachian tube dysfunction, laryngomalacia, chronic rhinitis, hearing loss, deafness, macroglossia, obstructive sleep apnea, sinusitis, and upper respiratory infection.

[7] Could include studies of acute T-cell lymphoid leukemia, acute B-cell lymphoid leukemia, acute myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia, Transient Myeloproliferative Disorder, and Transient Abnormal Myelopoiesis.

[8] Could include studies of gastroesophageal reflux, chronic constipation, chronic diarrhea, dysphagia, celiac disease, Hirschsprung disease, pyloric stenosis, irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, peptic ulcers, gallstones, hemorrhoids, diverticulitis, duodenal atresia, stenosis or web, anal stenosis or atresia, esophageal atresia, dysuria, voiding dysfunction, kidney disease, cystic dysplastic kidney, hydronephrosis, hydroureter, posterior or anterior urethral valves, renal agenesis, vesicoureteral reflux, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

[9] Could include studies of acne, alopecia areata, atopic dermatitis/eczema, boils/hidradenitis suppurativa/folliculitis, cellulitis, psoriasis, rosacea, tinea capitis, fungus, vitiligo, and xerosis (dry skin).

[10] Could include studies of arthropathy, hypotonia, atlantoaxial instability, fractures, cervical spine degeneration, osteopenia, osteoporosis, osteoarthritis, and scoliosis (curvature).

[11] Could include studies of congenital/infant diabetes, insulin resistance, and type 1, type 2, and pre-diabetes.

[12] Could include, but not limited to, studies of type 1 diabetes, celiac disease, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, alopecia areata, atopic dermatitis/eczema, dermatitis herpetiformis, dermatomyositis, hidradenitis suppurativa, lichen planus, lichen sclerosis, vitiligo, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, arthropathy, rheumatoid arthritis, vasculitis, hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenic purpura, myositis, restless leg syndrome (rarely autoimmune), Meniere’s disease, autoimmune encephalitis, inflammatory bowel disease/Crohn’s disease, narcolepsy, Kawasaki disease, Pediatric Autoimmune Neuropsychiatric Disorders Associated with Streptococcal Infections syndrome, sarcoidosis, and systemic lupus erythematosus.

[13] Could include, but not limited to, studies of group A streptococcus, C. difficile infection, recurrent otitis media, recurrent sinusitis, RSV, pneumonia, candidiasis, croup, chronic urinary tract infection, impetigo, cellulitis, Staphylococcus (Staph) infection, cold sores/human papilloma virus, shingles, periodontitis, gout, sepsis, tuberculosis (TB) or latent TB, SARS-CoV-2, and upper respiratory infections. 

[14] Biospecimens could include, but are not limited to, buccal DNA, hair, blood, cord blood, brain, CSF, saliva, tissues from surgeries, urine, stool, skin, amniotic fluid, placenta, and dried bloodspots collected during newborn screening. 

This page last reviewed on March 29, 2024

Connect with Us

• More Social Media from NIH

NIH Writing Groups

Writing a strong application for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Project Grant (R01) requires dedicated, careful thought and time for writing. PIs often struggle to carve out dedicated grant writing time in a schedule already full of teaching, research, service and other scholarly activities. Being part of a peer writing group, which meets at a regularly scheduled time for the dedicated purpose of writing, can offer the extra push and accountability PIs need to help their applications materialize.  

To support principal investigators as they pioneer revolutionary, comprehensive research, OVPR Research Development has partnered with the Population Research Center (PRC) to offer R01 Writing Groups. 

Because early-career and new-to-NIH PIs may find writing an R01 to be particularly daunting, the R01 Writing Groups Program offers additional support designed around the needs of “pre-R01” PIs. Throughout the academic year, the groups will offer R01 skill-building events and component-specific resources. Critically, they will facilitate specific feedback from NIH-experienced UT PIs at key points in the writing process to ensure participants receive institute-specific expert guidance.  

The R01 Writing Groups Program is centered around 4-6 person writing groups, matched according to shared research interests and availability. Writing Groups will meet regularly throughout the academic year to make progress on their R01 applications (minimum of 1.5 hours, every other week). Groups will be self-directed, taking advantage of sample agendas and OVPR-provided meeting spaces to develop a group that meets all members’ needs.

Additionally, participants will have access to:

• R01 skill-building events (e.g., workshops, Q&As)
• A curated library of R01 resources and guides
• Opportunities for feedback on drafts from NIH-experienced UT PIs (once per semester)

Eligibility  

• Must be a UT Principal Investigator
• Must be working on an NIH R01 application (for any deadline through November 2024)
• Must commit to meeting with your writing group for a minimum of 1.5 hours every other week throughout the academic year
• Participation is capped at 40 participants. If interest exceeds this limit, preference will be given to PIs who have not yet secured R01 funding, regardless of career stage or history of R01 submissions

Registration

R01 Writing Groups are currently closed. Writing Group eligibility begins over the summer, between semesters. 

Questions?  

Contact  [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Heart-Healthy Living
• High Blood Pressure
• Sickle Cell Disease
• Sleep Apnea
• Information & Resources on COVID-19
• The Heart Truth®
• Learn More Breathe Better®
• Blood Diseases and Disorders Education Program
• Publications and Resources
• Blood Disorders and Blood Safety
• Sleep Science and Sleep Disorders
• Lung Diseases
• Health Disparities and Inequities
• Heart and Vascular Diseases
• Precision Medicine Activities
• Obesity, Nutrition, and Physical Activity
• Population and Epidemiology Studies
• Women’s Health
• Research Topics
• Clinical Trials
• All Science A-Z
• Grants and Training Home
• Policies and Guidelines
• Funding Opportunities and Contacts
• Training and Career Development
• Email Alerts
• NHLBI in the Press
• Research Features
• Past Events
• Upcoming Events
• Mission and Strategic Vision
• Divisions, Offices and Centers
• Advisory Committees
• Budget and Legislative Information
• Jobs and Working at the NHLBI
• Contact and FAQs
• NIH Sleep Research Plan
• About the NHLBI
• Division of Lung Diseases
• < Back To National Center on Sleep Disorders Research

National Institutes of Health Sleep Research Plan

• Strategic Goals

Critical Opportunities

About the plan, executive letters.

This plan presents a vision that advances the mission of the National Center on Sleep Disorders Research and builds on almost three decades of unparalleled success by sleep and circadian researchers. The five strategic goals and tactics demonstrate how the sleep and circadian sciences can advance medicine and promote public health. Additionally, the nine critical opportunities (CO) highlight the potential to broaden the landscape of biomedical sciences in the context of sleep and circadian research.

Strategic Goals and Tactics to Achieve Them

The strategic goals are long-term objectives that, if reached, have the potential to change the  landscape of sleep and circadian research. They set research priorities and benchmarks that will  improve our scientific knowledge, transform health care, and advance public health and safety  and the well-being of the nation .

Sleep and Circadian Mechanisms Underlying Health and Disease

Risk Reduction and Treatment for Disorders

Clinical Implementation of Sleep and Circadian Research

Sleep and Circadian Disruptions and Health Disparities

Sleep and Circadian Biology Research Workforce Development

to Address Research Goals in Sleep and Circadian Biology

The nine critical opportunities are timely and actionable research directions with the potential to significantly impact sleep, circadian, and biomedical sciences across the translational spectrum.

Vision and insights from Dr. Francis Collins, Director of the NIH, and Dr. Marishka Brown, Director of the National Center on Sleep Disorders Research.

An overview of the 2021 NIH Sleep Research Plan and its development.

Executive Summary

A brief history of the NIH Sleep Research Plan, milestones in sleep and circadian research, and the 2021 NIH Sleep Research Plan strategic goals and critical opportunities.

NCSDR's Overarching Mission

To promote sleep and circadian scientific advances with high translational value to improve our scientific knowledge, transform health care, and advance public health and safety and the well-being of the nation.

Downloadable Document

The full 31-page PDF of the 2021 NIH Sleep Research plan is available to print or download.

• NIH Employee Intranet
• Staff Directory
• En Español

OCRECO Home > Clinical Research Education > Introduction to the Principles and Practice of Clinical Research (IPPCR)

OFFICE OF CLINICAL RESEARCH EDUCATION AND COLLABORATION OUTREACH

• Clinical Research Education
• Funding Opportunities

Introduction to the Principles and Practice of Clinical Research (IPPCR)

• Course Information
• Description
• Registration
• Course Login

Description Important Dates General Information Course Objectives Individual (Non-Registered) Lecture Option Texbook Contact --> Welcome

The Introduction to the Principles and Practice of Clinical Research (IPPCR) course trains registrants on how to effectively and safely conduct clinical research. The course focuses on the spectrum of clinical research and the research process by highlighting biostatistical and epidemiologic methods, study design, protocol preparation, patient monitoring, quality assurance, ethical and legal issues, and much more.

Course Objectives

Provide an overview of basic biostatistical and epidemiologic methods involved in conducting clinical research.

Describe the principles involved in the ethical, legal, and regulatory issues in clinical human subjects research, including the role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs).

Describe principles and issues involved in monitoring patient-oriented research.

Describe the infrastructure required in performing clinical research and the steps involved in developing and funding research studies.

Intended Audience

This course will be of interest to physicians, scientists, medical and dental students, nurses, public health professionals, and others conducting or planning a career in clinical research.

Course Directors

Social media links.

• Bookmark & Share
• E-mail Updates

Page Footer

• Visitor Information
• Privacy Notice
• Accessibility
• No Fear Act
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
• USA.gov – Government Made Easy
• HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

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

NIH…Turning Discovery Into Health®

Transforming the understanding and treatment of mental illnesses.

Información en español

Celebrating 75 Years! Learn More >>

• Science News
• Meetings and Events
• Social Media
• Press Resources
• Email Updates
• Innovation Speaker Series

Revolutionizing the Study of Mental Disorders

March 27, 2024 • Feature Story • 75th Anniversary

At a Glance:

• The Research Domain Criteria framework (RDoC) was created in 2010 by the National Institute of Mental Health.
• The framework encourages researchers to examine functional processes that are implemented by the brain on a continuum from normal to abnormal.
• This way of researching mental disorders can help overcome inherent limitations in using all-or-nothing diagnostic systems for research.
• Researchers worldwide have taken up the principles of RDoC.
• The framework continues to evolve and update as new information becomes available.

President George H. W. Bush proclaimed  the 1990s “ The Decade of the Brain  ,” urging the National Institutes of Health, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), and others to raise awareness about the benefits of brain research.

“Over the years, our understanding of the brain—how it works, what goes wrong when it is injured or diseased—has increased dramatically. However, we still have much more to learn,” read the president’s proclamation. “The need for continued study of the brain is compelling: millions of Americans are affected each year by disorders of the brain…Today, these individuals and their families are justifiably hopeful, for a new era of discovery is dawning in brain research.”

Still, despite the explosion of new techniques and tools for studying the brain, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), many mental health researchers were growing frustrated that their field was not progressing as quickly as they had hoped.

For decades, researchers have studied mental disorders using diagnoses based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)—a handbook that lists the symptoms of mental disorders and the criteria for diagnosing a person with a disorder. But, among many researchers, suspicion was growing that the system used to diagnose mental disorders may not be the best way to study them.

“There are many benefits to using the DSM in medical settings—it provides reliability and ease of diagnosis. It also provides a clear-cut diagnosis for patients, which can be necessary to request insurance-based coverage of healthcare or job- or school-based accommodations,” said Bruce Cuthbert, Ph.D., who headed the workgroup that developed NIMH’s Research Domain Criteria Initiative. “However, when used in research, this approach is not always ideal.”

Researchers would often test people with a specific diagnosed DSM disorder against those with a different disorder or with no disorder and see how the groups differed. However, different mental disorders can have similar symptoms, and people can be diagnosed with several different disorders simultaneously. In addition, a diagnosis using the DSM is all or none—patients either qualify for the disorder based on their number of symptoms, or they don’t. This black-and-white approach means there may be people who experience symptoms of a mental disorder but just miss the cutoff for diagnosis.

Dr. Cuthbert, who is now the senior member of the RDoC Unit which orchestrates RDoC work, stated that “Diagnostic systems are based on clinical signs and symptoms, but signs and symptoms can’t really tell us much about what is going on in the brain or the underlying causes of a disorder. With modern neuroscience, we were seeing that information on genetic, pathophysiological, and psychological causes of mental disorders did not line up well with the current diagnostic disorder categories, suggesting that there were central processes that relate to mental disorders that were not being reflected in DMS-based research.”

Road to evolution

Concerned about the limits of using the DSM for research, Dr. Cuthbert, a professor of clinical psychology at the University of Minnesota at the time, approached Dr. Thomas Insel (then NIMH director) during a conference in the autumn of 2008. Dr. Cuthbert recalled saying, “I think it’s really important that we start looking at dimensions of functions related to mental disorders such as fear, working memory, and reward systems because we know that these dimensions cut across various disorders. I think NIMH really needs to think about mental disorders in this new way.”

Dr. Cuthbert didn’t know it then, but he was suggesting something similar to ideas that NIMH was considering. Just months earlier, Dr. Insel had spearheaded the inclusion of a goal in NIMH’s 2008 Strategic Plan for Research to “develop, for research purposes, new ways of classifying mental disorders based on dimensions of observable behavior and neurobiological measures.”

Unaware of the new strategic goal, Dr. Cuthbert was surprised when Dr. Insel's senior advisor, Marlene Guzman, called a few weeks later to ask if he’d be interested in taking a sabbatical to help lead this new effort. Dr. Cuthbert soon transitioned into a full-time NIMH employee, joining the Institute at an exciting time to lead the development of what became known as the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) Framework. The effort began in 2009 with the creation of an internal working group of interdisciplinary NIMH staff who identified core functional areas that could be used as examples of what research using this new conceptual framework looked like.

The workgroup members conceived a bold change in how investigators studied mental disorders.

“We wanted researchers to transition from looking at mental disorders as all or none diagnoses based on groups of symptoms. Instead, we wanted to encourage researchers to understand how basic core functions of the brain—like fear processing and reward processing—work at a biological and behavioral level and how these core functions contribute to mental disorders,” said Dr. Cuthbert.

This approach would incorporate biological and behavioral measures of mental disorders and examine processes that cut across and apply to all mental disorders. From Dr. Cuthbert’s standpoint, this could help remedy some of the frustrations mental health researchers were experiencing.

Around the same time the workgroup was sharing its plans and organizing the first steps, Sarah Morris, Ph.D., was a researcher focusing on schizophrenia at the University of Maryland School of Medicine in Baltimore. When she first read these papers, she wondered what this new approach would mean for her research, her grants, and her lab.

She also remembered feeling that this new approach reflected what she was seeing in her data.

“When I grouped my participants by those with and without schizophrenia, there was a lot of overlap, and there was a lot of variability across the board, and so it felt like RDoC provided the pathway forward to dissect that and sort it out,” said Dr. Morris.

Later that year, Dr. Morris joined NIMH and the RDoC workgroup, saying, “I was bumping up against a wall every day in my own work and in the data in front of me. And the idea that someone would give the field permission to try something new—that was super exciting.”

The five original RDoC domains of functioning were introduced to the broader scientific community in a series of articles published in 2010  .

To establish the new framework, the RDoC workgroup (including Drs. Cuthbert and Morris) began a series of workshops in 2011 to collect feedback from experts in various areas from the larger scientific community. Five workshops were held over the next two years, each with a different broad domain of functioning based upon prior basic behavioral neuroscience. The five domains were called:

• Negative valence (which included processes related to things like fear, threat, and loss)
• Positive valence (which included processes related to working for rewards and appreciating rewards)
• Cognitive processes
• Social processes
• Arousal and regulation processes (including arousal systems for the body and sleep).

At each workshop, experts defined several specific functions, termed constructs, that fell within the domain of interest. For instance, constructs in the cognitive processes domain included attention, memory, cognitive control, and others.

The result of these feedback sessions was a framework that described mental disorders as the interaction between different functional processes—processes that could occur on a continuum from normal to abnormal. Researchers could measure these functional processes in a variety of complementary ways—for example, by looking at genes associated with these processes, the brain circuits that implement these processes, tests or observations of behaviors that represent these functional processes, and what patients report about their concerns. Also included in the framework was an understanding that functional processes associated with mental disorders are impacted and altered by the environment and a person’s developmental stage.

Preserving momentum

Over time, the Framework continued evolving and adapting to the changing science. In 2018, a sixth functional area called sensorimotor processes was added to the Framework, and in 2019, a workshop was held to better incorporate developmental and environmental processes into the framework.;

Since its creation, the use of RDoC principles in mental health research has spread across the U.S. and the rest of the world. For example, the Psychiatric Ratings using Intermediate Stratified Markers project (PRISM)   , which receives funding from the European Union’s Innovative Medicines Initiative, is seeking to link biological markers of social withdrawal with clinical diagnoses using RDoC-style principles. Similarly, the Roadmap for Mental Health Research in Europe (ROAMER)   project by the European Commission sought to integrate mental health research across Europe using principles similar to those in the RDoC Framework.;

Dr. Morris, who has acceded to the Head of the RDoC Unit, commented: “The fact that investigators and science funders outside the United States are also pursuing similar approaches gives me confidence that we’ve been on the right pathway. I just think that this has got to be how nature works and that we are in better alignment with the basic fundamental processes that are of interest to understanding mental disorders.”

The RDoC framework will continue to adapt and change with emerging science to remain relevant as a resource for researchers now and in the future. For instance, NIMH continues to work toward the development and optimization of tools to assess RDoC constructs and supports data-driven efforts to measure function within and across domains.

“For the millions of people impacted by mental disorders, research means hope. The RDoC framework helps us study mental disorders in a different way and has already driven considerable change in the field over the past decade,” said Joshua A. Gordon, M.D., Ph.D., director of NIMH. “We hope this and other innovative approaches will continue to accelerate research progress, paving the way for prevention, recovery, and cure.”

Publications

Cuthbert, B. N., & Insel, T. R. (2013). Toward the future of psychiatric diagnosis: The seven pillars of RDoC. BMC Medicine , 11 , 126. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-11-126  

Cuthbert B. N. (2014). Translating intermediate phenotypes to psychopathology: The NIMH Research Domain Criteria. Psychophysiology , 51 (12), 1205–1206. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12342  

Cuthbert, B., & Insel, T. (2010). The data of diagnosis: New approaches to psychiatric classification. Psychiatry , 73 (4), 311–314. https://doi.org/10.1521/psyc.2010.73.4.311  

Cuthbert, B. N., & Kozak, M. J. (2013). Constructing constructs for psychopathology: The NIMH research domain criteria. Journal of Abnormal Psychology , 122 (3), 928–937. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034028  

Garvey, M. A., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2017). Developing a motor systems domain for the NIMH RDoC program.  Schizophrenia Bulletin , 43 (5), 935–936. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbx095  

Insel, T. (2013). Transforming diagnosis . http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/director/2013/transforming-diagnosis.shtml

Kozak, M. J., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2016). The NIMH Research Domain Criteria initiative: Background, issues, and pragmatics. Psychophysiology , 53 (3), 286–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12518  

Morris, S. E., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2012). Research Domain Criteria: Cognitive systems, neural circuits, and dimensions of behavior. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience , 14 (1), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2012.14.1/smorris  

Sanislow, C. A., Pine, D. S., Quinn, K. J., Kozak, M. J., Garvey, M. A., Heinssen, R. K., Wang, P. S., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2010). Developing constructs for psychopathology research: Research domain criteria. Journal of Abnormal Psychology , 119 (4), 631–639. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020909  

• Presidential Proclamation 6158 (The Decade of the Brain) 
• Research Domain Criteria Initiative website
• Psychiatric Ratings using Intermediate Stratified Markers (PRISM)  
• Roadmap for Mental Health Research in Europe (ROAMER)  

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Office of AIDS Research

Highlights: february 2024 nih office of aids research advisory council meeting.

The 65 th meeting of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of AIDS Research Advisory Council (OARAC), broadcast via NIH VideoCast , featured updates on the development of the next NIH Strategic Plan for HIV and HIV-Related Research and a request for interested parties to provide input on HIV research priorities.

OARAC provides advice to OAR on the planning, coordination, and evaluation of research and other HIV/AIDS activities conducted or supported by NIH.

Report from the Acting Director of OAR

This meeting was the first for Diana Finzi, Ph.D., in her capacity as Acting Associate Director for AIDS Research at NIH and Acting Director of OAR. Dr. Finzi provided updates on several new NIH leadership changes relevant to the HIV research program: Monica Bertagnolli, M.D. , as Director of NIH; W. Kimryn Rathmell, M.D., Ph.D. , as Director of the National Cancer Institute; and Tara A. Schwetz, Ph.D. , as Deputy Director for Program Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Initiatives. Dr. Schwetz provided opening remarks at the meeting.

Dr. Finzi also welcomed several incoming OARAC members and Ivy Turnbull, D.L.P., Ed.M., M.A., in her first official meeting as OARAC Chairperson. Dr. Turnbull is the Deputy Executive Director at the AIDS Alliance for Women, Infants, Children, Youth, and Families.

Dr. Finzi highlighted several OAR events:

• March 21-22, 2024 NIH HIV and Women Scientific Workshop
• April 24, 2024 NIH Workshop for Early Career Investigators in HIV .
• December 1, 2023 NIH World AIDS Day observance
• November 1-2, 2023 Community Voices: Forging the Path Forward for HIV Self-testing and Personalized Viral Load Monitoring .

Dr. Finzi concluded her remarks with discussion of OAR’s current efforts to develop the next NIH Strategic Plan for HIV and HIV-Related Research . This plan guides the largest public investment in HIV research, and OARAC members play a key role in its development.

2026-2030: NIH Strategic Plan for HIV and HIV-Related Research

OAR has initiated efforts across NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices to establish HIV research priorities and develop the FY 2026-2030 NIH Strategic Plan for HIV and HIV-Related Research. The office aims to launch the new plan in the summer of 2025. OAR Senior Policy Advisor Rachel Anderson, Ph.D.; and OAR Senior Science Advisor CAPT Mary Glenshaw, Ph.D., M.P.H.  described the current activities and outlined next steps toward developing the five-year plan. They requested input from OARAC and all interested parties via a Request for Information that is open until March 28, 2024.

A New Framework

OAR has proposed a new framework for the next five-year strategic plan. The new framework reflects the research continuum and is based on several foundational principles relevant throughout HIV research:

• Research to identify and address HIV-related health disparities is essential to ensure that the benefits of scientific advances reach all people and communities affected by HIV, including groups that have historically been underrepresented and underserved.
• Research must address the unique needs of people with HIV across the lifespan , particularly as people age with the virus, including those born with HIV.
• Engagement and partnership with communities affected by HIV are essential at every stage of research.

The proposed framework includes three broad research goals and one capacity-building goal that will be linked to corresponding objectives and topical priorities:

This updated framework allows for the increasing intersection of HIV prevention, treatment, comorbidities, and cure research across the continuum. Additional details are available via the OARAC meeting VideoCast .

Sources of Input and Timeline

Input from a broad range of sources is critical to establishing research priorities for the next strategic plan. OAR subject matter experts and the NIH HIV/AIDS Executive Committee provided input on the framework above and remain involved throughout the process. Researchers, practitioners, community advocates, federal partners, and the public provide input through various engagements, including a Request for Information , open until March 28, 2024.

OARAC, including leadership of NIH and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, plays a key role in the development of the plan. In addition to sharing direct input, OARAC members will be invited to participate in multi-sectoral task forces, convened by OAR and including experts from multiple sectors, to review and synthesize input and generate recommendations for research priorities.

Efforts to gather and synthesize input will continue through October 2024. OAR will then draft a plan and coordinate review with OARAC and across NIH, with the ultimate goal of launching the new plan in the summer of 2025. Stay tuned to the OAR website for continued updates .

Updates and Next Meeting

The meeting closed with updates from:

• NIH advisory bodies, including the National Advisory Allergy and Infectious Diseases Council, National Advisory Mental Health Council, National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse, and NIH HIV/AIDS Executive Committee.
• HIV Clinical Guidelines Working Groups of OARAC, which develop the HIV clinical practice guidelines that inform clinical practice in the U.S. and around the world.

Full details are available through the NIH VideoCast and meeting minutes on the OAR website.

The next OARAC meeting will take place on June 20, 2024. An agenda and additional details will be available on the OAR website . OARAC welcomes the submission of public comments via email to [email protected] .

This page last reviewed on March 28, 2024