University of Pittsburgh Alzheimer's study forced to shut down 90 days after NIH grant cancellation

Experts warn grant cancellations “will kill” Americans

The Trump administration’s cancellation of a federal research grant has forced a University of Pittsburgh study on Alzheimer’s disease risk among 600 older adults to end early, denying participants access to the cognitive test results they were promised when they consented to join the research.

The study examined how the built and social environments of two historically red-lined, low-income, majority-Black Pittsburgh neighborhoods may contribute to Alzheimer’s disease risk. The federal grant was canceled in August. Researchers Tamara Dubowitz and Andrea Rosso, an associate professor of epidemiology and brain-health expert at the University of Pittsburgh, were given 90 days to shut down the work — more than five months earlier than planned.

The study was designed to assess cognitive decline over the course of 18 months to two years. Trial participants took lengthy cognitive tests, often lasting hours and including deeply personal survey questions about childhood trauma, the Guardian reported.

At the time of the cancellation, researchers had just completed data collection and were preparing to convene experts to adjudicate cognitive test outcomes — a process requiring a neuropsychologist and geriatric psychiatrist, in-demand specialists whom even a well-resourced patient might wait up to a year to see. The federal government had invested more than $10 million in the study over five years. Researchers said they had hoped for a one-year, no-cost extension, since funds had already been frozen for months during the broader DEI-related upheaval.

“The University of Pittsburgh is in the process of submitting appeals to the National Institutes of Health regarding the agency’s recent termination of these awards,” said Jared Stonesifer, the university’s head of communications. “These appeals represent the first step in the administrative process meant to act as a pathway for the University, as the recipient of the grants, to seek review of funding decisions. The University believes these appeals are supported by a strong legal foundation and will present its position through the appropriate channels. While the process is ongoing, the University remains hopeful for a favorable resolution.”

Dubowitz said the appeal argues that delivering results to participants “is part of an ethical, orderly closeout, but we don’t know whether they are in agreement that that is the case.”

The cancellation is part of a wider pattern. According to Grant Witness, which tracks changes to federal research funding, the Trump administration has canceled, frozen, or otherwise disrupted more than 5,700 medical research grants funded by the National Institutes of Health over the past two years. More than 4,500 of those grants have since been restored. A JAMA study found that the cancellation of clinical trials alone has affected more than 74,000 participants nationally.

The cuts span a wide range of studies, including research on childhood hearing loss and pain during cesarean delivery, according to the JAMA analysis. Researchers and legal experts say the targeted cancellations appear to be test cases for making termination decisions stick in court as the administration seeks to move the entire $1 trillion federal grant-making apparatus under the control of political appointees.

The Pittsburgh researchers are now plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit against the NIH, which argues the administration is attempting to censor research whose conclusions it disfavors. “The plaintiff’s experiences and stories here really evidence that censoring research can have life or death consequences,” said Olga Akselrod, senior counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union’s racial justice program, and one of the lead litigators in the case. “It is dangerous for public health when research is censored based on political litmus tests, and particularly when it targets areas of research designed to address the needs of underserved populations that disproportionately experience negative health outcomes and some of the most accute health disparities.”

Roderick Blair, a 70-year-old trial participant who lives in the Homewood neighborhood, characterized the cancellation as a “clear” form of retribution for examining links between the health of Black Americans and structural racism. “If you don’t agree with me, you’re going to go to the woodshed,” Blair said. “What has this administration done that has not been a retribution?” “The most important thing that they added on every year was trust,” said Blair, about the researchers at Pitt. “They always gave you feedback on what you got, how you did, what you could do better.”

The two neighborhoods being studied were historically subject to redlining — the practice of denying mortgages, loans, or insurance to residents based on race. According to background cited in the Guardian’s reporting, Black Americans are twice as likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease compared to white Americans but are far less likely to be included in research. Of more than 12,000 brain imaging studies on Alzheimer’s disease, only around 700 report race at all; studies that do report race have more than 87 percent white participants.

Researchers argue that the administration has poorly defined its view of “DEI” and conflated the term with health equity — the broader field under which the Pittsburgh grant falls. The Trump administration has argued the grant “no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities” and that “the lack of concrete, objective, and measurable variables is not in alignment with NIH’s priorities related to ‘promoting research focused on scientifically valid measurable health outcomes.’”

Experts have also warned that grant cancellations “will kill” Americans. In the case of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, early diagnosis is critical. There is no cure for the disease, and treatments to slow its progression are best used early in the disease course.

The administration has continued canceling research grants in 2026 after thousands were reinstated following litigation by research institutions. The most recent cancellations include the Pittsburgh study, a second Alzheimer’s grant at the same institution, and a third at Emory University.