Create a sustainable funding model for research in universities

Universities play a unique role in bringing many parts of the research sector together – across academia, industry, the third sector and the NHS. They collaborate extensively with medical research charities which fund considerable amounts of research within the UK’s research infrastructure. In 2023, 87 per cent of the almost £1.7bn invested in research by members of the Association of Medical Research Charities (AMRC) took place in universities.

Despite being a vital part of the UK’s research ecosystem, research in universities is not currently financially sustainable, with many institutions operating in a financial deficit. When people generously donate to charities to fund medical research, they expect those donations to directly fund that research. The Charity Research Support Fund (CRSF) allows universities and research institutes which receive charitable funding to recover the ‘indirect’ costs of doing research that charity grants do not cover – such as the rising cost of energy – which are essential for that research to happen. The CRSF underpins charity investment in universities across England however it has seen a significant decrease in real terms over recent years.

At the ICR, we have the greatest relative proportion of CRSF-eligible income of any UK higher education provider. As a postgraduate institution, we do not have undergraduate students and we are therefore unable to cross subsidise the deficits from our research using income from undergraduate students, like other institutions do. The combination of these two factors mean that we are uniquely affected by the declining value of the CRSF. In fact, in 2022-2023, for research activity funded by UK charities, we recovered less than 60 per cent of the ‘full economic costs’ for our research activities which translated to a deficit of almost £30m. 

Specialist provider element (SPE) funding, provided by Research England, is awarded to a small number of specialist institutions, such as the ICR, in recognition of their excellence and global reach. This vital funding recognises the unique benefits smaller, specialist institutions bring to the UK from their world-leading research and the translation of their research into economic and societal impact, while acknowledging the challenges they face.

Our ask: Government should work with Research England to urgently uplift CRSF, so that English universities and research institutions can continue to conduct world-class cancer research in a sustainable manner, whilst also prioritising an increase in SPE funding to sustain the academic excellence of specialist institutions.

Our ask: Government should work with Research England to urgently uplift CRSF, so that English universities and research institutions can continue to conduct world-class cancer research in a sustainable manner, whilst also prioritising an increase in SPE funding to sustain the academic excellence of specialist institutions.

Advocacy Blogs

Latest ICR News

11/11/25

New research has ruled out hormone signalling as the reason why men with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) tend to have poorer outcomes than women, even when treated with the same intensive chemotherapy – a finding that helps refine future research and could influence clinical trial design.

The study, led by researchers at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, and The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust found that although AML cells express high levels of androgen receptors – proteins that respond to male sex hormones like testosterone – they do not appear to influence how the cancer grows or responds to treatment. The findings suggest that hormone signalling is not responsible for the sex-based survival gap in AML, and that other biological factors are likely at play.

Published in Leukaemia, funding for the study was provided by Cancer Research UK, the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre and the pharmaceutical and biotechnology company Bayer, who also provided the drug. The study was supported by The Royal Marsden Cancer Charity.

High receptor levels, but not the answer

To explore whether hormone signalling might explain this survival gap, the research team analysed more than 4,000 patients enrolled in two major UK acute myeloid leukaemia clinical trials, alongside lab experiments on AML cells for androgen receptor expression. They found high levels of these receptors in both male and female patients and observed that these levels were associated with worse survival, even if the receptors themselves weren’t helping the cancer grow.

However, when AML cells were exposed to testosterone-like hormones in the lab, the hormones had no effect on cell growth, survival or response to chemotherapy. Blocking the receptors with drugs commonly used in prostate cancer also failed to improve outcomes – either alone or in combination with chemotherapy. Even when studying the disease in mice, the combination therapy did not outperform standard treatment.

They also discovered that a common immune signal, called IL-6, may drive up these receptor levels – suggesting that inflammation, rather than hormones, may play a role in acute myeloid leukaemia outcomes.

The team also investigated oestrogen signalling, given its potential relevance to female biology. While AML cells expressed some oestrogen receptors, the hormone had no impact on cell viability or treatment response.

Refining the search for answers

The research team found that men had a lower remission rate of 86 per cent and a slightly higher relapse rate of 43 per cent than female patients – 89 and 40 per cent respectively – and that male sex remained an independent risk factor for poorer survival, even after accounting for genetic profile differences.

While the findings do not point to a new treatment strategy, they help clarify a key question in acute myeloid leukaemia research and rule out a previously plausible explanation. The study suggests that other factors – such as differences in drug metabolism, immune responses or mutation patterns – may be more important in driving sex-based differences in AML outcomes.

Previous research has shown that men may clear chemotherapy drugs more quickly than women, potentially reducing their effectiveness. Women also tend to have stronger immune responses, which could help control leukaemia more effectively. These areas now warrant closer investigation.

The study also highlights the importance of considering sex as a biological variable in future AML research and clinical trial design. Understanding how sex interacts with treatment could lead to more personalised and effective therapies for all patients.

A step forward in understanding AML biology

Senior author Dr David Taussig, Associate Honorary Faculty in Leukaemia at the ICR and Consultant Haematologist at The Royal Marsden, said:

“We found that acute myeloid leukaemia cells express high levels of androgen receptors, but these receptors don’t seem to help the cancer survive. That’s an important finding – it tells us that hormone signalling isn’t the reason men do worse with AML, and helps us focus on other, more promising areas.”

The team is now exploring how factors such as immune function and drug clearance contribute to AML outcomes, and whether these can be targeted to improve survival.

First author Dr Farideh Miraki-Moud, Higher Scientific Officer in Cancer Biology at the ICR, said:

“While much work remains, the findings mark a valuable step in refining our understanding of the biology of acute myeloid leukaemia – and guiding future research towards the mechanisms that matter most. We hope this will ultimately lead to more effective, personalised treatments for patients.”