As US pares back research funds, Israel Prize winner sees chance to cure brain drain

Among the medical centers that stand to lose tens of millions of dollars in funding under Trump administration budget cuts to the National Institutes of Health is New York’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, a world leader in the fight against the deadly disease.

But for Prof. Yinon Ben Neriah, a top Israeli cancer researcher who collaborates frequently with Sloan Kettering, there is a potential silver lining in US President Donald Trump’s campaign slashing funding to universities and other research institutes.

After years of many of Israel’s brightest minds being siphoned off to top-flight schools in the US, the cuts — as well as an academic environment in which Israelis are often made to feel unwelcome, if not downright boycotted — mean the country may now have a chance to stem the brain drain and win them back.

“The government should do something to encourage these people to come back,” Ben Neriah, 74, told The Times of Israel. “This can be a major opportunity for Israeli research.”

On Thursday, Israel’s Independence Day, Ben Neriah will be awarded the Israel Prize for his groundbreaking work investigating the biological links between chronic inflammation and cancer.

His discoveries have paved the way for new therapies and helped propel the development of a drug for the treatment of blood cancer that is widely used worldwide.

The immunologist is now focused on finding a cure for acute myeloid leukemia, or AML, considered one of the most aggressive and challenging types of cancer.

Speaking with The Times of Israel from New York during a recent research trip to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Ben Neriah spoke about the rise of cancer around the world, his personal connection to AML, and his hopes for the future of cancer research in Israel.

The following interview was edited for clarity and brevity.

First, congratulations on winning the Israel Prize. Why is your work with cancer research considered so important?

Cancer research is of global concern to many because cancer is becoming the number one killer in the Western world. Cardiovascular disease is much better controlled in terms of prevention than cancer because of statins [which lower cholesterol].

We’re doing a lot to prevent cancer with early diagnosis, colonoscopies, mammographies, etcetera, but we don’t have something like statins to reduce the incidence of cancer. So, cancer is on the rise, and cardiovascular disease is decreasing.

In America, they started the war on cancer about 50 years ago. And indeed, there have been improvements. But alongside the improvement, there is the aging of the population. When people live longer, they have a higher incidence of acquiring cancer.

In the Western world, also, there is also less physical activity. Being overweight, and not only obese, is a factor in several types of cancer, like breast cancer, colorectal cancer, and so on.

Can you talk about your current research?

We are interested in acute myeloid leukemia. A part of our research is aimed at improving drug therapy for AML. There is basically no cure for AML in elderly people. Younger people can be cured by intense chemotherapy with bone marrow transplantation. But for older people, leukemia is a big challenge.

Our field is called signal transduction signaling. How do cells talk to each other? How do protein, healthy cells, and cancer cells communicate?

We are doing basic research, and we still don’t fully understand cancer. Every year, we understand that we don’t understand enough.

What we are doing is what we call pre-clinical models, in which we study cancer development. And while studying that, we pay attention to opportunities. For example, about 15 years ago, we paid attention to a certain arm of our research that can lead to anti-cancer drug development, and we are pursuing it now, again.

Acute myeloid leukemia is very challenging. The five-year survival rate is only 20 percent, so we’re trying to improve it.

Do you have a personal connection to leukemia?

I had an uncle who died of acute myeloid leukemia. I really liked him, and I saw how difficult it was for him, but my research is not motivated by personal interest but by research interest. We saw something that we thought would be a good idea to improve leukemia therapy, and then we developed it. This is a very long process, which in Israel is very difficult because there are not enough investors and so on. We found a company in America, and they took control of our drug development.

Sometimes it’s not working as we would like, but it’s now in clinical studies at some of the best cancer centers in America, including Memorial Sloan Kettering, the MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.

Our main interest is to understand how cancer develops. And while we understand more and more how cancer develops, we can sometimes have an idea how to counter or block it. So that’s what we’re doing daily in our lab, and that’s why it’s very expensive research, so we need a lot of resources.

How do you think winning the prize will help your research?

It’s very recent, so I don’t know. Maybe it will help with grants.

We need to fund all our research. The government doesn’t give us anything. It’s all competitive research.

In my lab, we have some 12 people, and all the research expenses come out of our budget, which we acquire by competitive grants that we have to apply for. There’s competition.

For example, only seven or eight percent of people applying for European Research Council grants receive them. We are competing with European researchers. In Israel, there is a fund called the Israel Science Foundation, which provides the bread and butter for most Israeli research.

But I just want to give you the proportions, and you’ll understand why it’s so difficult to develop sophisticated research in Israel. The European grant pays 500,000 to 700,000 euros (NIS 2,065,925 to 2,892,295) per year, and it’s for five years.

The Israel Science Foundation grant is $70,000 (NIS 254,000) per year, less than 10% of the European funding.

What is happening to science research in America?

Trump has cut the budgets of the National Institutes of Health and a lot of the budgets of universities. It may be harder to survive as a researcher in America than in Israel because we have access to European resources, and Americans do not.

So, how do you see the future of research in Israel?

We have opportunities now. I don’t know the exact numbers, but of the Israeli researchers who are doing fellowships in America after completing a PhD in Israel, more than 50% wish to come back to Israel and develop their own careers in Israel. And they are still in America.

Before, people were inclined to stay in America and get jobs there. But now, because of all the cuts — and I know personally people who are affected by it — some Israelis who already accepted positions in America in good institutions were put on hold because there is no budget for these positions.

So the [Israeli] government should do something to encourage these people to come back. And this can be a major opportunity for Israeli research.

Have you spoken to people in the government about this?

Not yet. I’m a member of the Israel Academy of Sciences, and we have a meeting in a few weeks with the Science Committee of the Knesset. Before the prize ceremony, I will meet with Education Minister Yoav Kisch. I’ll tell him about this.

They don’t realize it’s a real opportunity. But to materialize the opportunity, you need to invest. It requires a budget to bring those people who are really brilliant and who can make a big change in Israeli science. Nothing is for sure in Israel nowadays, so we don’t know whether people will listen to us.

How have academic boycotts against Israel affected Israeli research?

First, there’s the impact of the war on various aspects of academic activities. Israelis are getting fewer international grants. There is an impact on the promotion of Israeli scientists. There are difficulties with international reviews of Israeli research, both for promotion and for funding. Fewer Israelis go for sabbaticals now, and fewer are invited to go to international conferences.

There is an impact.

What do you suggest?

Hey, this is an opportunity. Let’s take advantage of it. Let’s invest money. I’m doing whatever I can, both in my lab and talking to people, trying to promote researchers.

Everything falls back on budgets. Money is not easy to invest because it’s wartime. But I feel if they don’t take this opportunity now, our situation will deteriorate. The brain drain will continue.

In America, they have an industry that provides a lot of opportunities, for example, in biotech. Israeli biotech is minimal, while if you go to cities like Boston, New York, and San Francisco, there are so many opportunities for research in industry. So if academia is somehow endangered, at least there is still industry.

What is the future of Israeli research?

America is largely living on international students and postdocs. There are more international researchers than US citizens in laboratories in America, but now, for example, it’s almost impossible for Chinese students and postdocs to get positions in the US like they’ve done before.

In Israel, we have a minority of international researchers. We could leverage this and get, for example, Chinese students and postdocs.

Now, if the government would do something, but again, they think they are concerned that Trump won’t look at it favorably. If we do nothing, we will continue to suffer because international students during the war avoided coming to Israel and didn’t return.

I don’t know if anybody listens to us. If we can convince the government to invest, then it’s an opportunity. Let’s see what the future will be.