Bridging the prevention gap: funding distribution and methodological shifts in prevention-focused biomedical research under EU framework programmes.

Background: Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) contribute significantly to global morbidity and mortality, accounting for 74% of all deaths worldwide. Many of these chronic diseases can be prevented or their onset mitigated through lifestyle interventions. Complementing these efforts, robust biomarkers enable early diagnosis (secondary prevention), while tertiary prevention can reduce long-term complications and improve disease management. Moreover, the importance of prevention extends beyond NCDs to infectious diseases, where lifestyle-related factors can also play a pivotal role. Innovative human-based research methods have shown suitable for modeling several diseases and advancing drug discovery. These approaches are particularly relevant in prevention research, given the inherently human nature of the lifestyle and environmental factors associated with disease risk and progression.

Methods: Here we conducted a retrospective evaluation of biomedical research projects funded under the 7th Framework Programme (FP7), Horizon 2020, and currently ongoing Horizon Europe (HE). We developed and refined a computer-based approach based on the use of Natural Language Processing (NLP) to examine three key aspects: (i) the integration of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention in these projects, (ii) the biomedical research areas which most frequently incorporate prevention, and (iii) the use of animal-based research versus human-centric approaches.

Results: Our findings reveal a persistent gap in the percentage of prevention-focused biomedical research projects, with only 4.4%, 4.5%, and 1.9% of FP7, H2020, and HE projects, respectively, addressing prevention. This gap was particularly pronounced in certain biomedical research areas, such as age-related diseases and diabetes and metabolic syndrome research, which showed a decrease in the percentage of prevention-related projects especially under most recent framework programme (HE). While the reliance on animal-based methods has been generally modest, averaging around 26% of all prevention-related projects, tertiary prevention research, and prevention projects focused on some biomedical areas (i.e., age-related diseases, personalized medicine, antimicrobial resistance, bone disorders, and respiratory diseases) showed increased percentages in projects using animals under more recent FPs. Analysis of funding distribution revealed progressively less funding allocated to prevention-related projects focused on diabetes and metabolic syndrome, neurodegenerative diseases, age-related disorders, and AMR. In addition, the proportion of funding allocated to both secondary and tertiary prevention decreased under HE.

Conclusions: A shift toward human-centric approaches, particularly in prevention-focused research, is essential to enhance the translatability of findings. As policymakers prepare for the next EU funding framework, these insights offer critical guidance for developing targeted funding strategies that prioritize human-centric prevention research as a cornerstone of public health.