The NIHR Imperial BRC Surgery and Cancer Theme, Ovarian Cancer Action and Brain Tumour Research are running a joint pilot project call with £40,000 available from each funder.
Any clinical or academic member of staff with an employment contract with either Imperial College London or Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust will be eligible to apply.
Full details about the scope, selection criteria, eligibility and timelines of the call can be found here.
Download the application form here
Deadline: 1pm 14th July by email to Dr Antonia Gould
In the first head-to-head comparison of recommended hepatitis C treatments, researchers from Imperial College London have provided key evidence to support global efforts to eliminate the disease. Their findings have also helped uncover new ways to treat hepatitis C that could make it easier for more people to access and complete curative treatment.
The findings, published in The Lancet, confirm that current World Health Organisation (WHO)-recommended drug combinations for hepatitis C are highly effective, while also showing that alternative strategies, like shorter courses or taking treatment breaks, can still lead to successful outcomes.
Hepatitis C is a viral infection that affects the liver and can lead to serious complications (including liver cancer and cirrhosis) if untreated. It is spread through blood-to-blood contact and disproportionately affects marginalised communities around the world. In 2016, WHO set a goal to eliminate hepatitis C as a public health threat by 2030—but challenges remain.
The VIETNARMS trial—funded by the Wellcome Trust and led by investigators from Imperial College London in collaboration with, MRC Clinical Trials Unit and Oxford University Clinical Research Unit in Vietnam—enrolled over 600 adults with chronic hepatitis C. The trial was conducted at two major Vietnamese hospitals, the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Ho Chi Minh City and the National Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Hanoi. It focused on two key questions:
- Which of the WHO-recommended treatments works best in people with mild-to-moderate disease?
- Can we make treatment easier to access and complete without reducing the chances of cure?
Comparing two trusted treatments
Participants were randomly assigned to take one of the two WHO-recommended drug combinations: Sofosbuvir–daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) and sofosbuvir–velpatasvir (SOF/VEL).
The trial showed that both treatments worked extremely well, even among people with genotype 6, a rarer strain of hepatitis C that’s common in Vietnam. Despite previous concerns, both drug combinations were equally effective across all hepatitis C types.
Although previously considered less effective, SOF/DCV slightly outperformed SOF/VEL, with 97.4% of patients cured compared to 95.1%, and a 93% chance that it was the more effective of the two. This new head-to-head evidence could help countries make better-informed decisions about which treatment to prioritise, particularly where drug prices vary significantly.
Flexible treatment options
To support patients who may struggle to complete the standard 12-week course, due to cost, treatment burden, or challenges such as substance dependency or mental health conditions, an innovative trial design also tested four alternative treatment strategies using both drug combinations:
- Standard-of-care: Daily DAA tablets for 12 weeks (the current global standard)
- Induction-maintenance: Daily tablets for two weeks, then just five days a week (weekends off) for 10 more weeks injectable pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN): Four weeks of tablets, plus weekly injections of a drug called PEG-IFN
- Response-guided: After one week of daily DAA tablets, participants’ viral response to treatment is measured. Based on this, participants either continued treatment for four, eight, or the full 12 weeks.
Compared to the standard-of-care, the alternative strategies used in the trial involved fewer tablets and were easier for people to stick to. All of these strategies were non-inferior to standard-of-care, meaning they were not worse than standard-of-care by more than a pre-specified amount (10%).
The most effective alternative was the “induction maintenance” approach—this cured 99.3% of people, slightly more than the standard 12-week treatment, which cured 98.7%
The other two strategies also worked well. The PEG-IFN option, which combined tablets with weekly injections, cured 94.1% of participants. The response-guided approach, which adjusted treatment length based on how people responded in the first week, cured 92.9%.
However, people in the response-guided group who stopped treatment after just four weeks didn’t do as well, even if they showed a strong early response. This confirms earlier findings that four weeks of tablets alone isn’t enough for most people. Interestingly, the PEG-IFN group, who also had only four weeks of tablets, still had high cure rates, showing the added injections helped make the treatment more effective.
Global impact
By showing that shorter or more flexible treatment plans can still cure hepatitis C, the VIETNARMS trial opens the door to new approaches that could better meet people’s needs, particularly those with limited access to care, or who face challenges like mental health issues or substance use.
The results also provide clear evidence for governments, doctors and global health organisations to consider a broader range of options in national treatment programmes—while also potentially lowering the cost of care.
Professor Graham Cooke, senior author, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at Imperial and NIHR Imperial BRC Infection and AMR Theme Co-lead, said: “We expect this new evidence will help countries, clinicians and patients in the decisions they need to make if we are to achieve the ambitious WHO elimination targets for hepatitis C. By showing that a range of flexible and effective treatment options are possible, we hope our findings can support more inclusive, accessible and cost-effective care—especially in communities where treatment completion has been a challenge.”
Application Opens on 19 May 2025.
Funding to support Trust staff applying for NIHR fellowships. NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and the NIHR North West London Patient Safety Research Collaboration (PSRC) both have funding available to support staff to prepare and write applications for an NIHR fellowship.
BRC funding is specifically aimed at NMAHPPs (nurses, midwives, AHPs, Health Care Scientists, pharmacists and registered pharmacy technicians, psychologists and AHCS-accredited Clinical Research Practitioners), while the PSRC funding is available to all registered healthcare professionals proposing research related to patient safety. The funding, of up to £20,000, can be used to support up to 3 months’ salary for the applicant. This enables teams to backfill their post. Funding for the applicant may also include costs related to training courses, patient and public involvement, academic mentoring, and support with accessibility and reasonable adjustments as appropriate (please see the application forms for specific guidance).
The aim is to allow applicants protected time away from their usual role to write and submit an application.
To apply, download the Guidance and Application Form and submit the application by noon on 30 June 2025.
For more information, please contact Mekala Gunaratnam at m.gunaratnam@imperial.ac.uk
A major study of around 260,000 women, published in ERJ Open Research, shows an increase in asthma attacks in women with asthma who are taking the progesterone-only pill and are either aged under 35, or using fewer asthma treatments, or with a type of asthma called eosinophilic asthma.
There was no increase in asthma attacks for women taking the combined oestrogen and progesterone contraceptive pill. The researchers say their findings could be an important step towards understanding why women are more likely to have severe asthma than men.
The study was led by Dr Chloe Bloom, a Clinical Senior Lecturer in Respiratory Epidemiology at Imperial’s National Heart and Lung Institute (NHLI) and supported by Asthma + Lung UK and the NIHR Imperial BRC. She said, “Asthma is common in women, and unfortunately, women are twice as likely to die from asthma as men. To help prevent these deaths, we need a better understanding of why women are at greater risk.
“One theory is that sex hormones play a major role. But studying their effects can be tricky. For example, it’s often hard to know exactly when someone has reached puberty or menopause. Instead, we can study women who take sex hormone medications like the contraceptive pill, because we know exactly when they started and stopped using them.”
The researchers used the UK’s Clinical Practice Research Datalink to study a group of 261,827 women aged between 18 and 50 who had been diagnosed with asthma. They compared women who had never used the contraceptive pill with women who started taking either the combined or progesterone-only pill. They gathered data on whether the women experienced any asthma attacks – meaning they were either prescribed oral steroids for asthma, they visited the hospital emergency department for asthma or they died of asthma – between 2004 and 2020.
“We found that the combined pill did not affect whether women had asthma attacks. But some women who took the progesterone-only pill had more asthma attacks. These included women under 35 years old, those who used fewer asthma medications, like inhaled or oral steroids, and those with higher levels of inflammation linked to asthma in their blood,” Dr Bloom explained.
The risk of asthma attacks in women under 35 was around 39% higher in those taking the progesterone-only pill; in women taking fewer asthma treatments, the risk was around 20% higher; and in women with eosinophilic asthma (where sufferers have high levels of blood cells called eosinophils that cause inflammation) the risk was around 24% higher.
Dr Bloom said, “Our study is the first to look at a large group of women over time with such detailed data on both their contraceptive pill use and their medical history. We also used a special type of study design that mimics the methods of a clinical trial but applies to real-world health data. This approach helped us identify which groups of women might be more at risk of asthma attacks while using the pill.”
“Asthma is common in women of reproductive age, many of whom are taking the pill. This study helps women and healthcare professionals make more informed decisions about which contraceptive pill might be best for them. The findings also add another piece to the puzzle of why women may be more likely to have severe asthma than men.”
“This is an area that hasn’t been studied much. Most research has focused on oestrogen and testosterone, not progesterone. Our study is one of the first to show that progesterone may play an important role. We’re now calling for more research into how progesterone affects asthma, including how it might interact with asthma medications like steroids.”
The researchers are continuing to study the effects of sex hormones on asthma by looking at the possible effects of hormone replacement therapy and at the impact of pregnancy.
Professor Apostolos Bossios, Head of the European Respiratory Society’s group on airway diseases, asthma, COPD, and chronic cough, said, “We know that women are more likely to have asthma and to suffer more severe asthma. We need much more research to understand why asthma is worse for women than men, so we can begin to reduce the risk. This major study is an important step towards that aim.”
“Women with asthma who are taking the combined pill, or considering it, should speak to their doctor about their contraception options and their asthma symptoms. Whichever contraception they use, it’s vital that women with asthma use their preventer inhalers and any other prescribed treatments regularly.”
A partnership designed to rapidly turn scientific breakthroughs into medicines has yielded a potential treatment for pulmonary arterial hypertension.
Imperial College London is working with Apollo Therapeutics to develop a prospective monoclonal antibody treatment for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), a rare life-limiting condition for which there is no cure.
The potential treatment is based on a protein that was identified in original research by the university and is currently undergoing a proof-of-concept trial at Hammersmith Hospital, part of Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust. It is hoped that the treatment will alleviate patients’ symptoms and extend their lives.
Apollo Therapeutics was founded in 2016 to partner with world-leading UK universities to identify early-stage academic research breakthroughs with potential medical applications, and to partner with universities from an early stage to support their translation into new therapies. The partnership model is designed to bring these to market quickly for the benefit of patients and the UK life sciences sector.
Pulmonary arterial hypertension is a condition that affects the blood vessels in the lungs. Increased blood pressure makes the heart work harder than normal, causing damage and symptoms such as shortness of breath, chest pain, and light-headedness. PAH affects approximately 8,000 people in the UK.
Accelerating the translation of new breakthroughs
The partnership between Imperial and Apollo Therapeutics helped translate the basic science into proof-of-concept trials in ten years.
The prospective treatment (APL-9796) is based on a protein target identified by Imperial researchers in a 2015 Nature paper. Apollo worked with Imperial to translate the target into one of its flagship drug candidates, providing expertise in antibody production and supporting collaborative research with Imperial using animal models. The treatment was the first candidate from Apollo to enter Phase 1 trials and is among the first to enter trials with patients.
Professor Martin Wilkins, from the National Heart & Lung Institute, who is also an NIHR Imperial BRC Executive Committee member, along with Professor Lan Zhao led the team behind the Nature paper, said: “Without the close partnership and ready access to funding from Apollo Therapeutics, our route would have been to form a spinout company. But with the time taken to establish a company and secure the necessary expertise and investment, it would, at best, have taken many more years to progress a potentially life-saving new treatment to trials in patients.”
Richard Mason, Chief Executive Officer of Apollo Therapeutics said: “Our APL-9796 program is a perfect example of the model we are deploying at Apollo Therapeutics, where we work with academics at the world’s top universities such as Imperial College London to translate their breakthroughs in basic science into new therapies for major diseases.”
“What is particularly exciting for this program is that we went full circle – translating an important scientific discovery out of Imperial into a new therapeutic candidate and then dosing the first patient with the candidate at the Hammersmith Hospital, a teaching hospital within the Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust. We look forward to progressing APL-9796 through the clinic as a potential treatment option for people suffering from PH, where current treatments do not treat the underlying cause of their disease.”
The proof of concept trial is expected to return results quickly due to innovative remote monitoring technology pioneered in PAH patients by Professor Alex Rothman at the University of Sheffield which will make it possible to see patient outcomes in real time. An Orphan Drug Designation from the US Federal Drug Administration will further accelerate progression through trials, and the teams hope to enter later phase trials quickly if results are positive.
Close partnership
Apollo Therapeutics was founded in 2016 by the tech transfer offices of Imperial, University College London and the University of Cambridge to raise investment for translational medical research. It went on to raise £400 million in capital and become a standalone biopharmaceutical company with a mission to provide funding and expertise to support the development of new medicines from the earliest stages, benefiting from unprecedented access to research insights from leading UK universities, including Imperial.
Close partnerships between researchers, clinicians, businesses and investors are supported by WestTech London, an innovation ecosystem across West London anchored by Imperial. WestTech London will become a global powerhouse for innovation and entrepreneurship, creating jobs, attracting investment and cementing the UK’s position as a leader in science and technology.
