Running head: REFORMATION OF CANCER RESEARCH 1 REFORMATION OF CANCER RESEARCH 6 Reformation of Cancer Research Student College Research Proposal Should the cancer guidelines increase research funding towards recalcitrant cancers? Due to the controversy surrounding undetectable or terminal cancers, the issue has arrived in regards to making sure that funding is provided for these cancers as they are for other forms of cancers that are more likely to see survivors. This proposal will explore the feasibility in the exploration of recalcitrant cancers. Reformation of Cancer Research Introduction According to a nation-wide study conducted in 2009 by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), one in two people in the United States will be diagnosed with at least one type of cancer throughout their lifetime (“Surveillance”, n.d.). With such a shocking statistic, it is extremely imperative that American research teams continually update their practices of cancer research. Researchers must frequently analyze their active research strategies in order to remain up to date with the latest statistics and trends in the cancer world along with adjusting their research focus based on current statistical data. Key point 1 Claim: Despite their efforts, however, research is severely lacking with many styles of cancer. Regrettably, many of the types of cancers which lack research are some of the most terminal forms of cancer. These terminal cancers are known as recalcitrant cancers, and are classified as having less than a fifty percent chance of living more than five years (“Congressional Budget”, 2012). In order to become a well versed nation, the United States government must begin to shift their research focus toward recalcitrant cancers. Opposing viewpoint: Currently, cancer research groups are doing a superb job in analyzing several types of cancer and have made many ground breaking discoveries in both pre-emptive and post diagnostic procedures for multiple forms of cancer. Rebuttal: Current research practices in the United States have focused a large majority of their funding on a minute amount of the cancers known. As a result of this practice, many recalcitrant cancers have become severely limited as far as the amount of research being done. In the 2010 fiscal year, the National Cancer Institute published a document showing the allocation of research funds for specific types of cancers. Key point 2 Claim: In order to move forward with cancer research, the amount of funds allocated need to be redirected into the recalcitrant cancers that in the past have not received much funding. Cancers such as pancreatic cancer, liver cancer, lung cancer, esophageal cancer and ovarian cancer fall into this category (Healy, 2013). Each of the above mentioned cancers are in dire need of research in order to effectively gain knowledge on the disease process. As of today, .

1. Running head: REFORMATION OF CANCER RESEARCH
1
REFORMATION OF CANCER RESEARCH 6
Reformation of Cancer Research
Student
College
Research Proposal
Should the cancer guidelines increase research funding towards
recalcitrant cancers? Due to the controversy surrounding
undetectable or terminal cancers, the issue has arrived in
regards to making sure that funding is provided for these
cancers as they are for other forms of cancers that are more
likely to see survivors. This proposal will explore the feasibility
in the exploration of recalcitrant cancers.

2. Reformation of Cancer Research
Introduction
According to a nation-wide study conducted in 2009 by the
National Cancer Institute (NCI), one in two people in the United
States will be diagnosed with at least one type of cancer
throughout their lifetime (“Surveillance”, n.d.). With such a
shocking statistic, it is extremely imperative that American
research teams continually update their practices of cancer
research. Researchers must frequently analyze their active
research strategies in order to remain up to date with the latest
statistics and trends in the cancer world along with adjusting
their research focus based on current statistical data.

3. Key point 1
Claim: Despite their efforts, however, research is severely
lacking with many styles of cancer. Regrettably, many of the
types of cancers which lack research are some of the most
terminal forms of cancer. These terminal cancers are known as
recalcitrant cancers, and are classified as having less than a
fifty percent chance of living more than five years
(“Congressional Budget”, 2012). In order to become a well
versed nation, the United States government must begin to shift
their research focus toward recalcitrant cancers.
Opposing viewpoint: Currently, cancer research groups are
doing a superb job in analyzing several types of cancer and have
made many ground breaking discoveries in both pre-emptive
and post diagnostic procedures for multiple forms of cancer.
Rebuttal: Current research practices in the United States have
focused a large majority of their funding on a minute amount of
the cancers known. As a result of this practice, many
recalcitrant cancers have become severely limited as far as the
amount of research being done. In the 2010 fiscal year, the
National Cancer Institute published a document showing the
allocation of research funds for specific types of cancers.
Key point 2
Claim: In order to move forward with cancer research, the

4. amount of funds allocated need to be redirected into the
recalcitrant cancers that in the past have not received much
funding. Cancers such as pancreatic cancer, liver cancer, lung
cancer, esophageal cancer and ovarian cancer fall into this
category (Healy, 2013). Each of the above mentioned cancers
are in dire need of research in order to effectively gain
knowledge on the disease process. As of today, the above
mentioned cancers are considered to be extremely terminal, and
quite often individuals diagnosed with those types will not live
more than five years past diagnosis. In fact, the five-year life
expectancy for the above mentioned cancers is “6%
(pancreatic), 14% (liver), 16% (lung), 17% (esophageal) and
44% (ovarian)” (Healy, 2013, para. 4). One of the biggest
reasons these cancers have such a low survival rate is due to the
lack of research being done on the disease.
Opposing viewpoint: Some may argue that in removing funds
away from cancers most frequently researched will halt further
discovery for these cancers. People also say that with such
great advancements already made on the disease, why stop now.
Rebuttal: The answer is simple. America must step back and
look at what cancers are the most terminal and take into
consideration ways in which our nation can increase the life
expectancy of those cancers, while still researching the cancers
America knows a great deal about on a much smaller scale. A
study conducted by A. Carter and C. Nguyen looked at the
distribution of funding for cancers, and analyzed it against the
social burdens each cancer poses on society. It found, “a
considerable mismatch between funding levels and burden”
(Carter, 2012, para. 3). The study stated that the most effective
way to distribute research funds was to look at the social burden
the different types place on society. They state, “the most
straightforward burden measurement is to count raw mortality”
(Carter, 2012, para. 6). With this definition, it is quite clear
that the recalcitrant cancers must receive the greater majority of
the research funds, as they are the types with the greatest
incidence of mortality.

5. Conclusion
In the years to come, cancer research must change in order to
meet the increasing demands of cancer incidence and mortality
rates. Research teams must begin looking at the types of
cancers with the highest amount of mortality, not the types with
greatest popularity. It is essential that recalcitrant cancers see
an increase in the amount of money allocated toward
researching these forms of terminal cancer. In order to do this,
there needs to be a great restructure in the allocation and
placement of cancer funding. Funds must be taken away from
heavily researched areas and placed into areas with little to no
known knowledge of the disease. In addition, the research
framework guidelines must be revisited and updated to include
studying a vast array of cancers. Recalcitrant cancers must
begin to take precedence over commonly studied forms of

6. cancer in order for America to take hold of the deadly disease.
Finally, the research teams must focus their efforts in
understanding ways to prevent or to detect the disease in the
early stages versus solely researching treatments to reduce
mortality. In understanding ways to simplify treatment
protocols or eliminate the need for treatment, Americans will
see a significant decrease in the mortality rate of recalcitrant
cancers. In the upcoming years, if researched correctly,
Americans will definitely see a greater remission rate in
individuals diagnosed recalcitrant cancers as opposed to higher
mortality.
References
Carter, A., Nguyen, C. (2012). A comparison of cancer burden
and research spending reveals
discrepancies in the distribution of research funding. BMC
Public Health, 12(256). Retrieved from
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/12/526.
Congressional Budget Office. (2012, September). Recalcitrant
Cancer Research Act of 2012. Retrieved from
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/s356
6.pdf
Healy, M. (2013, January 4). Pancreatic, other dire cancers get
a legislative nudge. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/04/news/la-heb-pancreatic-
dire-cancers-law-20130103
National Cancer Institute. (2012). The National Cancer
Program: Managing the Nation’s Research Portfolio. Retrieved
from http://www.cancer.gov/PublishedContent/Files/
aboutnci/budget_planning_leg/plan-archives/nci_plan_2013.pdf
National Cancer Institute. (2010). NCI CAM Research Funding
Portfolio Analysis FY 2010.
Retrieved from

7. http://cam.cancer.gov/attachments/portfolio_analysis/portfolio_
analysis _fy10.pdf
National Cancer Institute. (n.d.). Surveillance Epidemiology
and End Results. Retrieved from
http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/all.html
Smith, R.A., Cokkinides, V. & Brawley, O.W. (2012). Cancer
screening in the United States, 2012: a review of current
American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in
cancer screening. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians,
2012(62), 129-142.
CASE 5A -- GLASER HEALTH PRODUCTS
Glaser Health Products of Ranier Falls, Georgia, is organized
functionally into three divisions: Operations,
Sales, and Administrative. Purchasing, receiving, materials and
production control, manufacturing, factory
personnel, inventory stores, and shipping activities are under
the control of the vice-president for
operations, George Gottlieb. Advertising, market research, and
sales are the responsibility of the vice-
president for sales, Jake Bogan. Accounting, budgeting, the
firm's computer center, and general office
management are delegated to the corporate controller
(Administrative), Charlie Kaplan. The following

8. cost categories are found in the company as a whole:
(a) Depreciation on factory equipment.
(b) Depreciation on office equipment.
(c) Depreciation on factory building.
(d) Advertising manager's salary.
(e) Assembly foreman's salary.
(f) Salespersons' salaries.
(g) Salespersons' travel expenses.
(h) Supplies for the Machining Department.
(i) Advertising supplies used.
(j) Electricity for the Assembly Department.
(k) Lost materials (scrap) in a Machining Department.
(l) Direct labor in the Assembly Department.
(m) Supplies for the sales office.
(n) Sales commissions.
(o) Packing supplies.
(p) Cost of hiring new employees.

9. (q) Payroll fringe benefits for workers in the Shipping
Department.
(r) Supplies for Production Scheduling.
(s) Cost of repairing parts improperly manufactured in the
Machining Department.
(t) Paint for the Assembly Department.
(u) Heat, light, and power for the factory.
(v) Leasing of computer equipment for the Accounting
Department.
Required:
1. Identify each of the costs with the appropriate division:
Operations, Sales, Administrative.
2. Identify each of the costs with one of the following:
(a) Unit-level activities. (c) Product-level activities.
(b) Batch-level activities. (d) Facility-level activities.
Organize these classifications by division: Operations, Sales,
Administrative.
3. Specify an appropriate cost driver for tracing costs
associated with the various levels of activities to
the next cost objective or products, whichever is appropriate.
4. Glaser Health Products is interested in using activity-based

10. costing to identify as many costs as
possible with the products. These costs will be used for
planning and control decisions rather than for
inventory valuation. The controller decided that all operation
costs will be related to products but only
those sales and administrative costs that are classified as unit-
level, batch-level, or product-level costs
should be related to products. Using preliminary stage cost
drivers, explain how individual items of
costs will be traced to activity groupings.
5. Using primary stage cost drivers, show how the costs should
be related to products.
6. Explain why it is necessary to use preliminary stage and
primary stage cost drivers.