The Stakeholder Advocacy

Partner of the Academy of

Radiology Research

Coalition for Imaging and Bioengineering Research www.imagingcoalition.org

March 2011 Welcome to our newsletter fo-

cusing on the value of medical IM- In This Issue
Advocate Staff AGING. We’ve had an exciting quar-
Renée L. Cruea, MPA ter of growth, as inside you’ll be  Radiation Dose Summit—Pg. 1
President introduced to our 28 new coalition  Imaging and Electronic Health
Michael Kalutkiewicz members. The diversity of our Records—Pg. 2, 4
Vice President of Government Affairs
patient advocacy community  New VP of Government Affairs— Pg. 2
Roxanne Yaghoubi
Policy and Programs Manager
demonstrates the broad role in  CIBR Welcomes New
which imaging research helps to Members!—Pg. 3
Angela Quick and
Sadaf Samay Renée Cruea, detect, diagnose and manage a myr-  Radiological Society of North
Assistant Editors President, CIBR iad of diseases. This strength in America 2010: Through the
diversity will be critical over the Eyes of a Patient Advocate—Pg. 5
……………….. next few months, as we appeal to policymakers that  NIH Initiative—Pg. 6
federal investments in biomedical research provide  National Institute on Aging
Steering Committee hope for patients, the potential to bend the healthcare Event—Pg. 6
William G. Bradley, Jr., MD, PhD, FACR cost curve, and economic activity across the country. I
Chair, Department of Radiology  NIH Appropriations Update—Pg. 7
hope you’ll be able to join us on Capitol Hill for our
 Upcoming Events—Pg. 8-9
University of California, San Diego
CIBR Chair May events (p. 8-9) to tell our stories of the exciting
Steven Seltzer, MD, FACR progress we’ve made.  CIBR Membership List—Pg. 10
Chair, Department of Radiology
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
ARR President

Sholom Ackelsberg CIBR Engages its Membership in a Summit on

Radiation Dose and Patient Safety
General Manager, Academic Research Portfolio
GE Healthcare

Pat A. Basu, MD, MBA By William G. Bradley, Jr., MD, PhD, FACR and Steven Seltzer, MD, FACR
Faculty (On Leave)
Stanford University
In late February, the National Institute over the past decade and is likely to move closer
Jim Beckett
Vice President, Clinical Research
of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengi- to zero in the future.
Philips Medical Systems, N.A. neering (NIBIB) organized a Radia-
R. Nick Bryan, MD, PhD tion Dose Summit in Bethesda, MD. A minority opinion is that low dose radiation is
Chair, Department of Radiology CIBR was privileged to cosponsor this good for you (“hormesis”); however, most sus-
University of Pennsylvania Health System
important meeting with the NIBIB. pect that very low doses of radiation can be toler-
N. Reed Dunnick, MD, FACR The goal of the conference was to ated in normal individuals through the immune
Chair, Department of Radiology
University of Michigan Medical Center bring together opinion leaders in the surveillance mechanism. While one of the authors
field of medical imaging and to articu- of this summary and others urged research into
Daniel Garen
Vice President, Healthcare Policy and late opportunities to close the gaps in the linear no-threshold hypothesis, others felt
Clinical Affairs our scientific knowledge through re- that this would be too small of a statistical effect
Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc.
search. to warrant the research. Still, others felt that it
Steven Haberlein
Vice President, Sales would be worthwhile to identify those patients
FUJIFILM Medical Systems USA, Inc. This meeting discussed why radiation with a genetically determined increased risk of
dose reduction is important and how we might cancer from radiation and most agreed with this
James Jorkasky
Executive Director achieve a sub-mSv (low-dose) CT study. Drs. concept.
National Alliance for Eye and Vision Research Hedvig Hricak and Steve Seltzer pointed out that
Richard Mather, PhD many patients are avoiding potentially life-saving During the summit, there were a number of talks
Senior Manager, Clinical Programs
Toshiba Medical Research Institute
CT scans for fear of radiation-induced cancer. Dr. on how to reduce radiation exposure during a CT
Bill Bradley further noted that many of the pa- scan by using tube current modulation, iterative
Oran Muduroglu
Chief Executive Officer
tients currently scanned by CT could be scanned reconstruction techniques, and reading noisier
Medicalis Corporation by MRI without radiation, albeit at increased (i.e., lower quality) images. For cardiac CT, use of
Martha Nolan, JD
cost. prospective cardiac gating causes a significant
Vice President, Public Policy reduction in dose. Elimination of unnecessary CT
Society for Women's Health Research The crux of the issue is to determine whether exams was another major mechanism in dose
Lenny Reznik any radiation exposure, no matter how small, reduction that can be achieved through the use of
Director, Enterprise Imaging & Information to a population leads to an increased inci- computerized online decision support systems to
Agfa HealthCare Corporation
dence of cancer. The current working model, i.e., help referring physicians order only those exami-
Sheila Ross the “linear no-threshold hypothesis” assumes nations that are medically necessary. Tracking
Special Counsel
Lung Cancer Alliance that, in fact, any radiation exposure is potentially organ-specific doses in a national registry was
harmful. While this is far from proven, the “worry also deemed a useful way to ensure that medical
Paul Tuma
Regional Vice President threshold” has moved from 250 mSv to 100 mSv radiation is used responsibly.
Nuance Communications, Inc.
Nuance Healthcare Division
Coalition for Imaging and Bioengineering Research
1029 Vermont Avenue, NW, Suite 505 ● Washington, DC 20005 ● imagingcoalition.org
 www.imagingcoalition.org

Imaging: How can Access
to Images Influence
Clinical Decisions as Part
of the Use of Electronic
Health Records?
By Renee Cruea and Sadaf Samay
On January 10-11, 2011, several CIBR
members attended a workshop spon-
sored by the Office of the National Coor-
dinator for Health IT (ONCHIT) and the
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging
and Bioengineering (NIBIB) entitled
“Images, Electronic Health Records,
and Meaningful Use: A Vision for the
Future.” The purpose of the workshop
was to discuss the inclusion of clinical
images as part of electronic health rec-
ords and the “meaningful use” criteria
that must be met for purposes of reim- Radiology Research, Dr. Ronald Arenson
bursement by the Centers for Medicare (University of California, San Francisco),
and Medicaid Services (CMS). This topic patient advocate Maureen Rigney (Lung
is very important to the imaging commu- Cancer Alliance), and Don Dennison of
nity for sharing of image data for reim- Agfa Healthcare Corporation.
bursement purposes. The presentations
featured several perspectives on the is- (Article continues on page 4)
sue of images in electronic health records
including discussions by those in primary
care, specialty care, and various stake-
holders such as patient advocacy leaders,
health information organizations, payers,
and integrated care providers. In addi-
tion, there was significant discussion
regarding the implementation of such a
mechanism, including cost analysis, effi-
cacy, interoperability and standardiza-
tion concerns, as well as bandwidth and
connectivity requirements.
Several affiliates of CIBR had the oppor- Drs. Ron Arenson (UCSF), Elizabeth
tunity to speak at this workshop, includ- Krupinski (University of Arizona), and
ing the past president of the Academy for Steven Seltzer (Brigham and Women’s
Hospital)

Mike Kalutkiewicz joins CIBR as the new VP of Government Affairs

Dear CIBR Membership,

After serving as a patient advocacy member of CIBR since 2009, I am happy

to be officially joining the staff at CIBR. I can speak from experience that
CIBR has an amazingly diverse membership, and has been able to bring its
members’ stories to the attention of federal policymakers. I hope that we
can build on CIBR’s wonderful government affairs agenda and expand some
of the programs that we have in place – particularly for those smaller pa-
tient organizations that may be headquartered outside of Washington, DC.

Over the next weeks and months, we’ll be providing patient groups with
advocacy alerts and information, as well as event reminders for programs
that we’ll be organizing on Capitol Hill. We hope you can participate in the-
se events as much as possible, and we’re looking forward to helping you get
our collective message before policymakers.

In the meantime, please look for important grassroots action alerts and
templates that you and your membership can use. All of us in the biomedi-
cal research community are facing enormous headwinds in Washington. Mike Kalutkiewicz, Vice President
However, we can’t afford to lose ground now. of Government Affairs, CIBR

I look forward to working with you!

Best,
Mike

March 2011 Page 2

 www.imagingcoalition.org

CIBR Welcomes 28 New Members!

To join us, please contact Mike Kalutkiewicz at

mkalutkiewicz@imagingcoalition.org
March 2011 Page 3
 www.imagingcoalition.org

(Electronic Health Records, continued from page 2)

The focus for the meeting was specifically on the value of “It is the patient who
imaging as part of the use of electronic health records
and how access to images can influence clinical decisions. ultimately and truly owns
Don Dennison from Agfa HealthCare presented a vendor
perspective on incorporating both simple and advanced
the record and who needs
imaging into their EHR systems. In particular, he dis-
cussed interoperability and standards considerations
it to be with him or her
when integrating words and pixels into a patient’s EHR.
Due to advances in imaging resolution quality, data stor-
wherever they access
age and management of high-resolution image files can
present a unique challenge.
care.”
Patient Perspectives
The workshop included valuable input from the patient
advocacy groups with regards to the agenda and the
—Martha Nolan, Vice
presentations. Maureen Rigney from the Lung Cancer
Alliance highlighted patient stories about interoperabil-
President of
ity issues (e.g., CD's getting lost, procedures being repeat-
ed because of software incompatibility, etc.) and also a Public Policy, Society
perspective on how users value access to their medical
images within the wider context of access to medical for Women’s Health
information as part of their electronic health record.
Research
The workshop had immense value for everyone in the

healthcare systems as well as the different imaging needs

and modalities for specialty providers. However, none of
the discussion focused on the incredible need of the aver-
age patient to make all of his or her health information
portable, understandable, and easy to access. It is the
patient who ultimately and truly owns the record and
who needs it to be with him or her wherever they access
Dr. Seltzer, President of ARR, with Don Dennison and Lenny
Reznik from Agfa HealthCare
care.”

imaging community due to the diverse viewpoints it
brought to the table. It is valuable and vital to have pa-
tient advocacy groups present and participating in the
workshop. However, some areas such as dentistry where
imaging is highly utilized, were underrepresented. Mov-
ing forward, CIBR will encourage and help
The workshop was extremely beneficial for addressing
the technical challenges of including imaging data as part
of EHRs. We hope to collaborate on future meetings
where other critical professions, such as dentistry, can be
part of the discussion.

facilitate additional patient advocacy involvement in

workshops and meetings that address issues that impact
their patient constituency.

Vice President of Public Policy for the Society of Wom-

en’s Health Research and CIBR steering committee mem-
ber Martha Nolan, stated that, “I found the discussion to
be very enlightening to my understanding of the chal-
lenges facing even well-financed and organized

March 2011 Page 4

 www.imagingcoalition.org

CIBR Brings Patient Advocate to RSNA 2010

By Martha Nolan , Vice President of Public Policy, Society for Women’s Health Research

I had the wonderful opportunity to attend the 2010 Radiological

Society of North America (RSNA) annual meeting in Chicago in
December as a guest of the Coalition for Imaging and Bioengi-
neering Research (CIBR). When Renee Cruea, Executive Director
for the Academy of Radiology Research and CIBR, invited me to
attend the RSNA as a patient advocate, I did not quite under-
stand the enormity of the meeting or what my role would be.
This invitation proved to be incredibly valuable not only for my
job as Vice President of Public Policy with the Society for Wom-
en’s Health Research (SWHR), but also for my role as patient
advocate and member of the CIBR Steering Committee. So I was
happy to pack my bags and head off to Chicago for 3 days as
what I believe was the first patient advocacy leader to attend the
RSNA as a guest in its 96 years of existence.

Attending the RSNA was an amazing experience. For those who

are not aware, the RSNA is the largest medical meeting in the
world. With nearly 60,000 in attendance, it is fair to say that eve-
ry facet of the world of radiology/imaging – from research to
manufacturing to clinical practice – was on display. As a patient
advocacy leader, this was a great opportunity for me to learn all
about biomedical imaging.

I greatly appreciated the opportunity to meet with so many Martha Nolan discusses the latest innovations in biomedical
hardworking scientists and researchers from various industry imaging during RSNA 2010
groups who were passionate about their advancements to help
patients. I had ample time to meet with each group and ask ques-
tions. In particular, many of my meetings were centered on ad- to quantify overall exposure. I brought up these stories at the
vances in breast cancer detection and treatment. The technology RSNA meeting because I believe that this issue will continue to
that was presented will hopefully transform how cancerous tu- impact medical decision making, especially since it comes on the
mors are located, removed, and treated in ways that are more heels of reports of overexposure due to CT scans. These reports
accurate, less invasive, and require less radiation. have left patients concerned, confused, and frustrated. If patients
were not aware of the issue of radiation exposure before they
During many of these meetings, I raised the issue of the need for certainly are now and, as a result, they will question the need for
patients to be more informed in order to foster effective collabo- any imaging studies. Going forward, informed patients who want
ration between them and their clinician. I explained that patients to be in the driver’s seat along with their doctors will need to
and their caregivers should not be underestimated in their abil- have the appropriate tools to make good medical decisions. Such
ity to become experts about their treatment decisions, including tools include a better understanding of how to reduce radiation
imaging and diagnostics. More and more often, especially with dose without compromising clinical outcomes, as well as an un-
the amount of information available online, patients and their derstanding of how vital organs receive and absorb radiation
loved ones are able to educate themselves about their disease dose.
and possible treatment options.
CIBR, I am proudly able to say, is the only coalition I am
Prior to the RSNA meeting in Chicago the uproar over airport aware of that is bravely attempting to address these issues
scanners hit the news, creating confusion over what the ma- while actively and consistently engaging patient advocacy
chines do and how they expose us to radiation. The fact that groups. CIBR’s diverse membership means that it is the logical
there were concerns over the amount of radiation used in the entity to advocate for more imaging research and to act as a fo-
airport scanners is of particular note since comparisons were rum for collaboration on these and other imaging-related issues.
made to the amount received in an X-ray. Even as the reports I look forward to returning to the RSNA next year and hope that
explained the various differences and attempted to put the mat- we are able to bring along other patient advocacy leaders as
ter into perspective, it raised the question for many people as to well.
what other types of radiation they had been exposed to and how

March 2011 Page 5

 www.imagingcoalition.org

Academy Helping NIH to Identify New addition, CIBR is working to establish an online database of po-
tential reviewers.
Imaging Reviewers, Promoting Tours
and Presentations at Additional ICs During the RSNA 2010 Annual Meeting, Dr. Meltzer and Elizabeth
Krupinski, Ph.D. (University of Arizona) led a workshop on the
By Renée Cruea and Roxanne Yaghoubi grant review process. The course educated participants about
different grant mechanisms, the criteria used for grant evalua-
Radiologists as Reviewers tion, and the process of becoming a reviewer. Most of the partici-
Under the leadership of Academic Council Chair Dr. Carolyn Melt- pants had never served as a grant reviewer for the NIH but based
zer (Chair of Radiology at Emory) and the Scientific Liaison Task on what they learned they agreed that they would consider doing
Force, the Academy of Radiology Research (ARR) is working to so in the future. The next workshop will take place during RSNA
grow radiology’s relationships with all of the NIH institutes that 2011. If you are interested in participating, or would like to sug-
have a strong imaging research portfolio. An important part of gest a study section that would benefit from the presence of an
this initiative involves supporting the placement of more radiolo- imaging researcher, please contact Roxanne Yaghoubi
gists and imaging researchers on study sections and advisory (ryaghoubi@imagingcoalition.org).
committees.
Academy Expands NIH Tour Schedule
The ARR Task Force is currently working to identify study sec- Another Academy initiative currently underway is to connect
tions that could benefit from the inclusion of an imaging re- more of the Institutes at NIH with a strong imaging portfolio to
searcher. NIH is currently soliciting the help of professional or- our community of patient advocacy groups and policymakers. In
ganizations and societies to identify well-qualified researchers to March, CIBR sponsored an imaging presentation at the National
serve as volunteer reviewers. The NIH has also revamped their Institute on Aging that focused on the important contributions of
peer review system over the recent years to make it friendlier in the radiology community to aging-related research. Events such
terms of the rigorous demands already placed on academic in- as these are essential to ensuring that interested constituencies
vestigators. The new streamlined review system features a short- are aware of the breadth and scope that imaging plays within a
er application and less travel time required of reviewers. The variety of Institutes and Centers. There will be other events simi-
ARR Task Force will be reaching out to members of the Academy lar to the NIA presentation later in the year. Please contact us if
Academic Council in order to ask them to nominate potential you are interested in participating or if you would like to suggest
reviewers, which the Academy will then forward onto NIH. In an IC that has a compelling imaging story to highlight.

CIBR Sponsors Briefing on Aging showed part of a documentary entitled “The Forgetting: A Por-
trait of Alzheimer’s.” The video described the work that re-
Research searchers at the University of Pittsburgh have done on the Pitts-
burgh Compound B. This is a radioactive compound that, when
By Roxanne Yaghoubi coupled with positron
emission tomography
On February 22, 2011, CIBR sponsored a presentation on imag- (PET) scans, allows
ing research at the National Institute on Aging (NIA), which is researchers to see the
part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Briefings such location and distribu-
as the one at the NIA play a critical role in CIBR’s education- tion of the beta amy-
al and advocacy efforts because they give congressional loid plaque deposits
staffers and patient advocates the op- associated with Alz-
portunity to learn more about scien- heimer’s.
tific research. This was CIBR’s 11th
briefing with an NIH Institute, and its first Following the video,
with an Institute other than the National Dr. Susan Resnick Drs. Lis Nielsen, Ronald Kohanski, Chhan-
Institute for Biomedical Imaging and Bio- gave a presentation da Dutta, Neil Buckholtz, Susan Resnick,
engineering (NIBIB) that is home to a entitled “Imaging & Richard Hodes at the NIA presentation
large imaging research portfolio. Brain Aging in Health
and Disease.” The morning ended with a presentation by Dr. Lis
During the event at the aging institute, Dr. Nielsen, who spoke about neuroeconomics, which is the study
Richard Hodes, the Director of the NIA, of how humans make decisions and the role that risk, reward,
gave an introduction and overview of the and emotion play in the aging brain. Question and answer ses-
institute’s mission. He was followed by sions followed each presentation.
presentations by Dr. Ronald Kohanski and
Dr. Richard Hodes, Dr. Chhanda Dutta. Next, Dr. Neil Buck- Building on the success of the NIA event, CIBR hopes to hold a
Director of the NIA holtz, the Chief of the Dementias of Aging briefing on Alzheimer’s and aging research on Capitol Hill later
Branch of the Division of Neuroscience, this spring. If you are interested in attending, please contact
spoke about Alzheimer’s research and Roxanne Yaghoubi (ryaghoubi@imagingcoalition.org).
March 2011 Page 6
 www.imagingcoalition.org

Funding Bill Cuts Science Budget, Implements Cap on Awards

By Mike Kalutkiewicz

Although March marks the halfway point for Fiscal Year include a diversity of populations, they still are counted as
(FY) 2011, the yearly budget remains in limbo. The House a single large award on the NIH books. NIH Directors will
of Representatives has passed its version of the budget, a have no choice but to limit the number of clinical awards,
$65b reduction package from FY2010 levels, while the Sen- in favor of typically smaller awards, in order to stay below
ate deliberates a smaller budget reduction package. In re- the $400,000 cap.
gard to life sciences research, the House’s bill, H.R. 1, calls
for a nominal dollar reduction to the National Institutes of Whereas cost was a factor all along in the administration of
Health (NIH) to FY2008 funding levels—a reduction of science, it would now be paramount to the merit of the
$1.6b (-5.3%) from FY2010. However, when factoring in application in many clinical instances. This is unfortunate,
inflation, the reduction in real dollars gives NIH the same as the proposed policy threatens the very research that is
purchasing power as it had in FY2001. necessary to bring cures from bench to bedside. If policy-
makers want faster cures, why introduce an unprecedent-
In addition to the dramatic budget reduction, H.R. 1 ed congressional mandate that ties the hands of NIH Direc-
requires NIH to fund a minimum number of 9,000 new tors to fund promising clinical trials?
awards at an average award of $400,000 per award.
For historical context, NIH funded 8,989 awards
in FY01 and 9,583 new awards in FY10 - an an-
nual growth rate of 0.64% over the 10 year
“And herein lies the trouble with H.R. 1’s
span. language, even beyond the draconian
For those that follow appropriations report budget cuts: NIH Directors will now have
language, you’d strain to find such prescriptive
language in the past. Congress has traditionally to eschew a large number of clinical tri-
lauded the NIH’s stringent peer review process
as the gold standard for ensuring that only the als, regardless of their merit, in order to
most scientifically meritorious applications re-
ceive funding. Legislators have demonstrated a
stay below the congressionally-mandated
reticence to intrude on NIH’s autonomy for allo-
cating scarce research dollars, leaving such de-
cap of $400,000 per award.”
cisions to the volunteer scientists who review and score As the Senate continues work on their version of the FY11
applications. If the National Cancer Institute (NCI) had a spending package, the fate of the language is uncertain.
strong application for a 15 site, $1.5m clinical trial, as iden- Coalitions like CIBR and the Ad Hoc Group for Medical Re-
tified by scientists in that field, it would be judged on its search Funding have worked to inform members in both
scientific merits the same way a $200,000 basic science the House and Senate of the consequences of such lan-
application would. The $200,000 application would not guage. The process, to finalize the FY11 appropriations
have an inherent advantage over high cost applications package, however, will likely continue throughout the
solely due to its smaller overall cost. An application’s abil- spring.
ity to move the scientific paradigm forward, and to ulti-
mately advance human health, was always the deciding For more information on how to contact your Members of
factor. Congress, or to sign up for CIBR Advocacy Alerts, please
email Mike Kalutkiewicz at mkalutkie-
And herein lies the trouble with H.R. 1’s language, even wicz@imagingcoalition.org
beyond the draconian budget cuts: NIH Directors will now
have to eschew a large number of clinical trials, regardless
of their merit, in order to stay below the congressionally-
mandated cap of $400,000 per award. Even though clinical
trials are typically situated across multiple locations and

March 2011 Page 7

Save the Dates: May Recess is all about Research!

March 2011 Page 8

March 2011 Page 9
 CIBR Member Organizations
AdMeTech Foundation
Agfa HealthCare Corporation
Alliance for Aging Research
Alliance for Prostate Cancer Prevention
Alpha-1 Association
Alpha-1 Foundation
Alzheimer’s Foundation of America
American Association for Women Radiologists
American Association of Physicists in Medicine
American Brain Tumor Association
American College of Nuclear Physicians
American College of Radiology
American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineering
American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine
American Osteopathic College of Radiology
American Pain Foundation
American Parkinson Disease Association
American Registry of Radiologic Technologists
American Roentgen Ray Society
American Society of Emergency Radiology
American Society of Neuroradiology
American Society of Radiologic Technologists
Arthritis Foundation
Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
Association of Community Cancer Centers
Association of Educators in Imaging and Radiologic Sciences
Association of Program Directors in Radiology
Association of University Radiologists
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Department of Radiology
Biotechnology Industry Organization
Blinded Veterans Association
Brain Injury Association of America
Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Department of Radiology
C3: Colorectal Cancer Coalition
Cancer Schmancer
Case Western Reserve University, University Hospitals Health System,
Department of Radiology
Children With Diabetes Foundation
Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation
Colon Cancer Alliance
Community Oncology Alliance
Cooley’s Anemia Foundation
COPD Foundation
The Daniella Maria Arturi Foundation
Duke University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology
Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology
Fibroid Relief
Fight for Sight
First Candle
FORCE: Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered
FUJIFILM Medical Systems USA, Inc.
GE Healthcare
Georgetown University Medical Center, Department of Radiology
Hydrocephalus Association
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Association
International & American Associations for Dental Research
International Eye Foundation
International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
International WAGR/11p Deletion Syndrome Association
Intracranial Hypertension Research Foundation
Johns Hopkins Medicine, The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology
and Radiological Science
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation
Kidney Cancer Association
Lighthouse International
Lung Cancer Alliance
Lung Cancer Circle of Hope
MaleCare
Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University
Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Radiology
Mayo Clinic, Department of Radiology
Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee WI, Department of Radiology
Medicalis Corporation
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Radiology
Men’s Health Network
Mental Health America
Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Department of Radiology
National Alliance for Eye and Vision Research
National Cervical Cancer Coalition
National Lung Cancer Partnership
National Patient Advocate Foundation
National Spinal Cord Injury Association
New York University Langone Medical Center, Department of Radiology
Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine,
Department of Radiology
Nuance Communications, Inc., Nuance Healthcare Division
Parkinson’s Action Network
Philips Medical Systems
Prevent Cancer Foundation
Prostate Cancer International
Prostate Health Education Network
Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation
Radiological Society of North America
RSNA Research and Education Foundation
Siemens Healthcare
Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine
Society for Pediatric Radiology
Society for Women’s Health Research
Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments
Society of Computed Body Tomography and Magnetic Resonance
Society of Interventional Radiology
SNM (formerly Society of Nuclear Medicine)
Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound
Society of Skeletal Radiology
Society of Thoracic Radiology
Society of Uroradiology
Susan G. Komen for the Cure
Taking Control of your Diabetes
Toshiba Medical Systems Corporation
Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance
University of California, Irvine Medical Center Department of Radiological
Sciences
University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Radiological Sciences
University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, Department of
Radiology
University of California, San Francisco, Department of Radiology
& Biomedical Imaging
University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, Department of Radiology
University of Louisville, Department of Radiology
University of Michigan, Department of Radiology
University of Minnesota, Department of Diagnostic Radiology
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Department
of Radiology
University of Pennsylvania, Department of Radiology
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Department of Radiology
University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Department of Diagnostic
and Interventional Imaging
University of Utah, Department of Radiology
University of Washington, Department of Radiology
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Radiology
Us TOO International
Von Hippel—Lindau Disease Family Alliance
Voices Against Brain Cancer
Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Diagnostic Radiology
ZERO—The Project to End Prostate Cancer