Request for Information from Investigators

Please provide responses to the following questions. Your input into this assessment is essential to produce meaningful results and is greatly appreciated. Please limit your overall response to less than 12 pages of material, including figures and tables, but not including appendices of supporting data. Suggested page limits for each answer are shown. Your document will be provided to the assessment panel members without editing by NIH staff. If you wish, you may consult with NIGMS staff (scientific liaisons and/or program officials) during development of these materials. In addition, you may be contacted by NIGMS staff or contractors working for NIGMS as necessary to verify information about measurable outputs of the program.

1. In brief, did the glue grant answer the original question that was posed? (1 page)
   1. What were the goals and milestones? Were they met?
   2. Did the execution of the project follow the plan as originally set forth and the concept of the glue grant program as initially conceived? If not, how did it evolve over time? 
2. Please summarize the major contributions that resulted uniquely from the glue grant and that would not have been possible without this funding. (5 pages)
   1. Provide up to five examples of progress in knowledge and understanding of biomedically important problems that emerged from the glue grant. Please describe each briefly and provide appropriate citations to key papers.
   2. Identify major contributions to methodology and technology that have been developed by and/or because of the glue grant and that have been of benefit to other investigators.
   3. Cite five papers that exemplify the integration and interactivity of the participants that have been facilitated by the glue grant. Describe the roles of the investigative groups, if this is not obvious from the paper.
   4. Cite examples where you know the glue grant activities have led to new independent funding of the participants or others. An exhaustive list of all grant support of the participating investigators is not needed.
   5. Although training new researchers was not a stated goal of the glue grant program, graduate students and postdoctoral fellows participated in some of the projects. Provide information on such personnel and comment on how their training and subsequent career progression were influenced by the glue grant.
3. Please describe how in your view the field of research has changed and what has been the role of the glue grant in those changes. (1 page)
4. What is the legacy you expect to persist after the end of the project period? What do you expect to be the lasting effect on the field? What are your expectations for continued collaborations? How do you anticipate disseminating results and materials in the post-glue grant period? (1 page)
5. What evidence can you provide regarding the usage of data generated by the glue grant both by investigators within the project and by investigators outside the project? (1 page)
6. In an appendix, please list complete and cumulative information on publications and on other objective measures of output such as patents and licenses. See recommended format for publications below.

Publications List

Please provide a complete, cumulative listing of all publications and submitted manuscripts that have arisen from the glue grant from its inception through September 30, 2010, whether this grant was specifically cited in the publication or not (e.g., some journals do not list grant numbers). Please use the recommended format below.

• Complete bibliographic information in PubMed format including PubMedCentral ID numbers.
• Bold Face the names of the glue grant investigators
• Underline the names of other authors supported by the glue grant award.
• Include the Funding Acknowledgement section text from the publication.
• Include a brief statement explaining the role of the glue grant award in enabling the research to be performed.

Examples:

Digman MA, Brown CM, Horwitz AF, Mantulin WW, Gratton E. Paxillin dynamics measured during adhesion assembly and disassembly by correlation spectroscopy. Biophys J 2008; 94 (7):2819-31. PMCID: PMC2267137. - Imaging & Photomanipulation.

Funding Acknowledgment: These studies were supported in part by Cell Migration Consortium grant U54 GM64346 to M.D., A.H., C.B., W.M., and E.G., and by National Institutes of Health grant P41-RRO3155 to E.G. and W.M.

CMC Contribution: The Consortium was the main source of funding of this research.

Harley BA, Kim HD, Zaman MH, Yannas IV, Lauffenburger DA, Gibson LJ. Micro-architecture of three-dimensional scaffolds influences cell migration behavior via junction interactions. Biophys J 2008; (8):4013-24. PMCID: PMC2553126. - Modeling. aug08c.

Funding Acknowledgment: We gratefully acknowledge support from the NIGMS Cell Migration Consortium (HDK, MHZ, DAL), the Cambridge-MIT Institute (BAH, IVY, LJG), the Matoula S. Salapatas Professorship in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at MIT (LJG), the Whitaker-MIT Health Science Fund Fellowship (BAH), and the Sokol Foundation (MHZ).

CMC Contribution: HD Kim's research assistant support was partially provided by the CMC; he carried out the predominant portion of the cell migration experimental studies.

Other Objective Measures of Output

No specific format is recommended for these items.