Access hard-to-reach clinicians. With in-office visit restrictions, it can be difficult for pharma reps to connect with clinicians. Here’s the good news: Primary care clinicians are still seeking out the latest healthcare innovations. Pri-Med helps you connect with those hard-to-reach primary care clinicians, both digitally and in person. Read about it here.
Researchers worry a technology hailed for helping end a global pandemic could soon be sidelined.
Messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology was used to create the Covid-19 vaccine under the first Trump administration, saving about 3 million lives by independent research nonprofit the Commonwealth Fund’s estimate. Studies involving mRNA focus on its potential to treat fatal diseases including pancreatic cancer and glioblastoma. The mechanism teaches people’s bodies how to recognize and attack viruses—or potentially tumors—before being broken down.
But researchers worry the NIH may halt these efforts during President Donald Trump’s current term. Some scientists and health professionals say mRNA vaccines haven’t been proven safe enough to administer for diseases like Covid-19 despite strong data suggesting the technique’s safety.
Though neither Trump nor his cabinet have spoken against mRNA vaccines specifically, the NIH requested a list of all federally funded vaccine research, and scientists said NIH officials told them to remove any mention of mRNA from grant applications in March. Officials reportedly told NPR on March 12 they feared mRNA research cuts could be next after grants were terminated for research into vaccine hesitancy.
Meanwhile, at least 16 states have moved to ban Covid-19 or mRNA vaccines amid significant vaccine hesitancy. In 2019, the WHO named vaccine hesitancy as one of the top 10 threats to global health. The phenomenon reached “new levels” during the Covid-19 pandemic, fueled by misinformation spread across social media, according to a 2022 review in the New England Journal of Medicine.
The NIH did not respond to Healthcare Brew’s request for comment by deadline.
“We are concerned. The industry is concerned. And even if nothing directly happens, there’s skittishness within the marketplace and the sector,” Jeff Coller, the distinguished professor of RNA biology and therapeutics at Johns Hopkins University, said during a media briefing on April 10.
Industry balks. The safety, effectiveness, and precision of mRNA makes it potentially “revolutionary” to treat “almost every known disease,” Jordan Green, a Johns Hopkins professor and biomedical engineer who develops new biotechnology to improve the delivery system of mRNA, said during the briefing.
Yahoo Finance reported in October that the global mRNA therapeutics market was worth $34.8 billion in 2024. The article said it is expected to reach $40.7 billion in 2028.
But in a March 2025 survey of more than 100 life sciences professionals by the Alliance for mRNA Medicines—an organization Coller helped found—over half said federal cuts to mRNA research would send them searching for other funding sources or potentially end their programs, he said during the briefing.
Over half also said they have felt a “direct” impact from policy changes so far, including “reduction in scope for projects, budget reductions, delayed capital, investment partnership terminations, job loss, and hiring freezes,” Coller said.
Uncertain future. On an individual level, it’s an uncertain time to be any kind of researcher, let alone one studying mRNA.
Elizabeth Jaffee, an oncologist focused on immune-based therapies for pancreatic and breast cancers and deputy director of the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, said during the briefing she and her patients are concerned that her research could be terminated.
“We don’t have a lot of funding for doing these trials beyond the National Institute of Health,” Jaffee said. “And the way things are going, I have to be honest, you’re told a day in advance that your grant is cut.”