Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Research Center Oversight topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
UNMC pancreatic cancer center director tells Board of Regents of administrative barriers to research and patient care
Summary
Dr. Sunil Hingorani, director of the Pancreatic Cancer Center of Excellence at UNMC, told the Board of Regents the center faces administrative barriers that he said threaten its research and patient care work, and requested a meeting with the board to discuss those issues.
Dr. Sunil Hingorani, the inaugural director of the Pancreatic Cancer Center of Excellence (PCCE) at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, told the Board of Regents on Aug. 14 that the center’s work has been repeatedly obstructed by administrative decisions and individual actors.
Speaking during the meeting’s public comment period, Hingorani said he was recruited in July 2022 to lead the PCCE and that the center is funded through a partnership combining state funds with philanthropic support to UNMC. He described multiple operational problems he said threaten the center’s research and patient care missions: state funds diverted to pay salaries that he said should be paid by UNMC and Nebraska Medicine; repeated blocks on purchases of mass spectrometry and spatial profiling equipment he called “essential” for early detection and therapeutics work; cybersecurity and patient-data management deficiencies that have deterred outside collaborators; facilities management awarding contracts at what Hingorani said were sometimes “as much as 500% over the most competitive bid”; and Nebraska Medicine’s marketing declining to advertise the PCCE’s multidisciplinary clinic because, he said, the unit does not acknowledge the Board of Regents’ authority to designate centers of excellence.
Hingorani told the regents he has raised these concerns repeatedly in writing and in person with senior university and medical center leadership, and that those attempts have not produced satisfactory changes. He asked the board for an opportunity to meet with regents to discuss the issues in detail and to resolve them.
The board did not take action or provide a direct response during the public comment period; the chair closed public comment and the meeting proceeded to consent and administrative agenda items.
Note: Allegations cited here are those made aloud during the public comment period. The transcript records Hingorani’s claims; the board did not take a formal action at the meeting to investigate or adjudicate the specific allegations. Details such as procurement percentages and fund diversions were stated by Hingorani in his remarks and are reported here as his assertions.
