Non-smoking Lung Cancer Grants Programme

There are 48,500 new lung cancer cases in the UK each year. That’s around 130 people per day who are diagnosed with the disease (1). Around 15% of lung cancer is in those who are non or never smokers (2) and the overall number of lung cancer in non-smokers is on the rise (3). It is estimated that nearly 6,000 people in the UK who have never smoked die of lung cancer every year (4).

At the Ruth Strauss Foundation, we want to bring people together to influence high-quality research into non-smoking lung cancers. Only then can we identify the causes of the disease so that people with non-smoking lung cancer are diagnosed earlier, have access to evidence-based information and better treatments and live longer and healthier lives.

We are launching our first non-smoking lung cancer grants programme which will award funding of up to £50,000 to promising research/projects that focus on improving the lives of people with non-smoking lung cancers.

VIEW REFERENCES

Lung cancer statistics | Cancer Research UK accessed 08/08/23
Khan, S., Hatton, N., Tough, D. et al. Lung cancer in never smokers (LCINS): development of a UK national research strategy. BJC Rep 2, 1 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44276-023-00006-w
Cufari ME, Proli C, De Sousa P, Raubenheimer H, Al Sahaf M, Chavan H, Shedden L, Niwaz Z, Leung M, Nicholson AG, Anikin V, Beddow E, McGonigle N, Dusmet ME, Jordan S, Ladas G, Lim E. Increasing frequency of non-smoking lung cancer: Presentation of patients with early disease to a tertiary institution in the UK. Eur J Cancer. 2017 Oct;84:55-59. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.06.031. Epub 2017 Aug 4. PMID: 28783541.
Bhopal A, Peake MD, Gilligan D, Cosford P. Lung cancer in never-smokers: a hidden disease. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 2019;112(7):269-271. doi:10.1177/0141076819843654

Key Information

Applications open
14 August 2023

Applications close
13 November 2023, 5pm

Total funding available
£150,000

Maximum per grant
£50,000

Application Form

More details

If you have any questions or would like more information about the Ruth Strauss Foundation grants programme, please contact:

Deepa Doshi
Head of Mission Services
T: 07930 340774
E: Deepa.doshi@ruthstraussfoundation.com

AMRC Membership

The Ruth Strauss Foundation is proud to be an introductory member of the Association of Medical Research Charities (AMRC).

The AMRC supports medical research charities in funding the best research through specialist guidance and training, and through auditing charities’ funding processes. The Association also brings together and champions charities to drive positive change in medical research, with the ultimate mission of saving and improving lives.

Introductory membership of the AMRC demonstrates our commitment to funding and delivering the best research into non-smoking lung cancer. We run the research grants programme according to the Association’s best-practice guidelines.

Non-smoking Lung Cancer Grants Information

Research Aims

We welcome grant applications to fund research projects that aim to improve the lives of people with non-smoking lung cancers.

Specifically, we invite applications for research that supports Ruth Strauss Foundation’s vision in one of the following ways:

To increase public understanding and awareness of non-smoking lung cancers.
To enhance understanding of who is diagnosed with non-smoking lung cancer.
To improve the process or experience of being diagnosed with non-smoking lung cancer, including achieving earlier diagnosis.
To widen access to treatment for non-smoking lung cancers.
To improve the process or experience of being treated for non-smoking lung cancer, such as managing the side effects of treatment.
To improve how the psychological, information, financial and practical needs of people with non-smoking lung cancer are met during and beyond active treatment and at end of life. This may include:
- improving how support is accessed or offered,
- better supporting informed decision making around treatment and care.

What We Fund

We will fund only the direct costs of the research/project.
We will fund salary costs for staff leading and delivering the research, as long as dedicated time is available for the delivery of the research.
Whilst the grant predominately aims to support primary research, secondary research projects will be considered, for example, projects that will review data/outcomes from previous research that progresses the understanding in this field.
Grants can be used to fund a standalone project, or to fund research that forms part of or contributes to a wider project – provided it contributes something original and is not merely a temporal extension of that project.
Research/projects will need to start within 6 months of funding being awarded.
We will only fund costs related to the research/project over a period of 18 months.

Please note that we cannot award grants for research that supports drug development.

Who Is Eligible?

Applicants must be employed at a university, NHS hospital, hospice or research institution in the UK. We accept applications from joint lead applicants, and where joint applications are successful the funding will be awarded to a single lead applicant.

Please note: lead applicants outside the UK cannot apply

How To Apply

Download the application form below.

All sections of the application must be completed. The proposal will be for maximum of £50,000 and meet the grants programme criteria.

Please send your completed applications to: deepa.doshi@ruthstraussfoundation.com
Applications must be received no later than 5pm on Monday 13 November 2023.

Download Application Form

More details

If you have any questions or would like more information about the Ruth Strauss Foundation grants programme, please contact:

Deepa Doshi
Head of Mission Services
T: 07930 340774
E: deepa.doshi@ruthstraussfoundation.com

Application Review Process

When completing the application form, we will ask you to provide us with up to two names and contact details of experts who can provide a written review of your application. We call these individuals Expert Written Reviewers. The Ruth Strauss Foundation works to the 5 principles of peer review as set out by the Association of Medical Research Charities: ACCOUNTABILITY, BALANCE, INDEPENDENCE, ROTATION AND IMPARTIALITY. Please see our Terms of Reference for the Grants Allocation committee that outlines exactly how we embed these five principles.

We may not use the names you provide, and we may not require an external written review for your application either because the level of funds you requested does not require it, or because we have the expertise within our GAC to complete the review. Please ensure you have not recently (in the last three years) worked or co-published with the names you have suggested. We will share the name of the Lead Applicant, host organisation, research /project title, project proposal and total amount requested with a maximum of two independent written reviewers. Reviewers will have the choice to decline participation in the review and will receive RSF’s Privacy Notice, which includes instructions on how to opt-out if they so wish to do so.

Assessment Process

All applications submitted will be assessed by the RSF Grants Allocation Committee (GAC). The Grants Allocation Committee members consists of the members of the Scientific Advisory, with the addition of two individuals who are living with lung cancer. The GAC will assess and score each application using the Medical Research Council Scoring Matrix as suggested by the AMRC. The GAC will meet in the first two weeks of February 2024 and within two weeks of the meeting, the Head of Mission Services will write to all applicants with a decision from the Committee. See our Terms of Reference for the Grants Allocation Committee, for details on how the committee operates.

Please also see our flow chart which outlines the whole grants process and what happens at each step and by whom: Flow chart document.

Proposals will be given a score from 1-10 (where 1-2 is ‘poor quality’ and 9-10 is ‘excellent quality’) for each of the criteria:

Importance & Originality

How important are the research questions that will be answered?
Is the study likely to contribute significant new understanding to the field of non-smoking lung cancer or lung cancer in people who have never smoked?
Is there sufficient evidence that an exhaustive literature search has been carried out to confirm that the research project is of sufficient quality, and does not overly duplicate any previous work?

Design & Methodology

How good is the scientific quality of the proposal?
Is the proposal original and innovative?
Is there a robust methodology and study design at the centre of the proposal?
How well have ethical issues and project risks been identified, and how will they be mitigated?

Potential impact

What is the potential economic and societal impact of the proposed research?
Is the proposed research likely to result in benefits to health services and/or to people with non-smoking lung cancers?
Does the proposal identify the potential impacts of the research and include plans to deliver them?

People and workplace including patient and public involvement (PPI)

How suitable are the research team and collaborators?
How suitable is the environment where the proposed research will take place?
Does the proposed research include patient and public involvement (PPI) either in the study design or in the research itself?

Value for money

Is the funding amount the applicant has requested essential for the work involved the research and fully justified?
Does the proposal reflect good value for money?

Establishing Research Priorities

The Ruth Strauss Foundation collaborated with Dr Virginia Harrison from the Open University to create a survey. This survey aimed to assist RSF in determining the areas of research into non-smoking lung cancers that the grants programme should focus on.

The survey included a comprehensive list of cancer research topics based on the Common Scientific Outline (CSO), which classifies broad areas of scientific interest in cancer research, but with some modifications.

A total of 39 respondents – including oncologists, cancer nurse specialists, respiratory specialists, GPs, researchers, and other professionals – completed the survey. They rated which areas of lung cancer research were most important, and which were most feasible with grants of up to £50,000, both on a scale of 1 to 7 (where 7 is most important/feasible and 1 is least important/feasible).

The following 5 had a score of 5 or more on both importance and feasibility and inform the RSF’s research priorities for this grants programme:

Patient care and survivorship issues (including quality of life, psychological and physical symptoms, and impact on family and finances)
Wellbeing interventions/approaches to promote psychological adjustment to the diagnosis of cancer and to treatment effects
End-of-Life Care
Development or analysis of health service provision, policy or practice
Influence of behavioural and social factors on cancer control, outcomes and treatment

View More Survey Findings

For each area of research, we asked those completing the survey what aspects of lung cancer research were most important and then what was most feasible with a grants programme offering £50,000. The survey was shared at British Thoracic Oncology Conference in April 2023 and at Lung Cancer Nursing UK in May 2023. Both organisations also shared the survey with their members, as did the UK Lung Cancer Coalition. A total of 39 professionals completed the survey. Here is a breakdown of who completed the survey:

We asked those completing the survey how familiar they are with the current non-smoking lung cancer literature, answering on a scale from 1 = Not familiar at all to 5 = Extremely familiar. The overall average = 3.49, so those completing the survey are familiar with the literature and therefore able to comment on the importance and feasibility of the research priorities. Oncologists and chest/respiratory physicians rated themselves as most familiar with the research at 4.5 and 4.4 respectively. With GPs rating themselves as the least familiar at 2.

Below are the 25 areas of research under the CSO which were graded as most and least important and then most and least feasible both on a scale of 1 to 7. In red below are the scores which were above a mean of 5. The table below shows rank orders, where 1 is the highest and 25 is the lowest. All areas scored above 4 on the importance scales; 18 scored over 5. Only 17 areas scored above 4 in terms of feasibility; 10 scored over 5.

Descriptive Statistics

Swipe To Browse

Importance	Feasibility	Area	Mean I	Mean F
3	1	Wellbeing interventions/approaches to promote psychological adjustment to the diagnosis of cancer and to treatment effects	6.08	5.91
1	2	Patient care and survivorship issues (including quality of life, psychological and physical symptoms, and impact on family and finances)	6.44	5.83
15	3	Education and communication for cancer control	5.33	5.37
14	4	Influence of behavioural and social factors on cancer control, outcomes and treatment	5.36	5.34
8	5	End-of-Life Care	5.72	5.34
13	6	Development or analysis of health service provision, policy or practice	5.38	5.23
18	7	Complementary approaches for supportive care of patients and survivors	5.05	5.17
21	8	Economic and health policy analyses	4.85	5.03
24	9	Ethics and confidentiality in Cancer Research	4.38	5.03
19	10	Resources and infrastructure related to cancer control, survivorship, and outcomes research	4.90	5.00
10	11	Interventions to reduce behaviours related to cancer risk (such as smoking, drinking, UV exposure)	5.56	4.86
12	12	Surveillance or epidemiological research	5.44	4.86
25	13	Complementary and alternative treatment approaches	4.26	4.46
22	14	Dietary interventions to reduce cancer risk and nutritional science in cancer prevention	4.79	4.40
23	15	Complementary and alternative prevention approaches	4.41	4.37
5	16	Exogenous factors (such as lifestyle, social, or environmental factors) in the origin and cause of cancer	5.92	4.34
4	17	Resources and Infrastructure Related to Detection, Diagnosis, or Prognosis	5.92	4.20
17	18	Localised therapies (such as surgery or radiotherapy)	5.15	3.80
11	19	Systemic therapies (such as chemotherapy or TKIs)	5.51	3.77
2	20	Technology development and/or marker discovery and evaluation	6.08	3.74
20	21	Chemoprevention and other medical interventions	4.85	3.71
6	22	Technology use and/or marker testing in a clinical setting	5.90	3.66
9	23	Endogenous/genetic factors in the origin and cause of cancer	5.67	3.57
7	24	Biological bases of cancer initiation or progression	5.72	3.46
16	25	Vaccines for cancer prevention	5.28	3.34

The following 5 had a score of 5 or more on both importance and feasibility and inform the RSF’s research priorities for this grants programme:

Swipe To Browse

Importance	Feasibility	Area
1	2	Patient care and survivorship issues (including quality of life, psychological and physical symptoms, and impact on family and finances)
3	1	Wellbeing interventions/approaches to promote psychological adjustment to the diagnosis of cancer and to treatment effects
8	5	End-of-Life Care
13	6	Development or analysis of health service provision, policy or practice
14	4	Influence of behavioural and social factors on cancer control, outcomes and treatment
15	3	Education and communication for cancer control
18	7	Complementary approaches for supportive care of patients and survivors