Administration of Trump discontinues studies aimed at aiding infants with heart maladies
In the realm of biomedical engineering, Cornell University's James Antaki found hope for countless infants. Securing a $6.7 million grant from the Department of Defense on March 30, 2025, promised to bring his life-saving invention, PediaFlow, to fruition. This device boosts blood flow in newborns with heart defects, potentially saving their lives during surgery or enabling them to live at home until a donor heart becomes available.
However, Antaki's dream was shattered a week later with a stop-work order from the Defense Department on April 8. The funding intended to be distributed over four years was abruptly revoked, jeopardizing three decades of meticulous research. The Defense Department and White House have remained silent on the matter.
Antaki's predicament is part of a larger trend for academics across the nation, who've faced funding cuts since President Donald Trump assumed office. Executive orders limiting government support for certain projects, coupled with the widespread grant cancellations under Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, have left many like Antaki in the lurch.
Each year, approximately one in 100 babies in the US is born with heart defects. Of these, around a quarter require surgery or procedures within the first year to survive. In the global context, it's estimated that 240,000 infants succumb to congenital birth defects within their first 28 days.
PediaFlow, a tiny device resembling an AA battery, uses a rotating propeller on magnets to increase blood flow and enhance these vulnerable infants' chances of survival. Prior grants from the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Defense have supported its development without issue, Antaki noted.
The canceled grant would have facilitated the prototype's further testing, including animal trials and the required paperwork for Food and Drug Administration approval. Antaki has been developing the technology since 2003, initially creating a similar device for adults. Upon arrival at Cornell in 2018, he obtained research funding from the Department of Defense to continue his work.
A copy of the stop-work order, viewed by NBC News, offers no insight into the reasons for the grant cancellation beyond "at the direction of the Administration." Dr. Evan Zahn, a pediatric interventional cardiologist at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles not involved with PediaFlow, considers the potential loss of funding a setback for infant healthcare, as there is a scarcity of commercially available solutions for babies with heart defects.
If funding isn't restored within 90 days, Antaki faces laying off lab staff and altering Ph.D. students' research focus. He emphasizes the grant's minuscule cost relative to its potential impact on countless lives, urging, "it just it kind of speaks for itself."
- The abrupt revocation of $6.7 million in funding, promised for four years, has jeopardized three decades of meticulous research on PediaFlow, a life-saving device for infants with heart defects, by Cornell University's James Antaki.
- In the realm of finance and politics, funding cuts have been a significant issue for academics like Antaki, primarily due to executive orders limiting government support for certain projects and widespread grant cancellations.
- Evan Zahn, a pediatric interventional cardiologist not involved with PediaFlow, considers the potential loss of funding a setback for infant healthcare, as there is a scarcity of commercially available solutions for babies with heart defects.
- If funding isn't restored within 90 days, Antaki faces layoffs of lab staff and alterations to Ph.D. students' research focus, as the canceled grant would have facilitated further testing, including animal trials and the necessary paperwork for Food and Drug Administration approval.
- Antaki stresses the minuscule cost of the grant in comparison to its potential impact on countless lives, urging, "it just kind of speaks for itself."
- The cancellation of the grant raises concerns about the role of science and medical-conditions within general-news and health-and-wellness, as well as the intersection between biomedical engineering, finance, and politics.
