The answer at a glance

• The 4% statistic is based on an older, narrower way of counting childhood cancer research.
• The latest available data place pediatric cancer at 8.7% of National Cancer Institute spending.
• Funding has increased, but changing how research is counted makes 4% and 8.7% an imperfect comparison.
• Neither number tells us how much goes specifically to childhood brain cancer.

By the numbers: Is it really 8%?

According to the latest available federal data, NCI spending categorized as pediatric cancer increased from $352 million in 2017 to $632 million in 2024. That brought its share of NCI spending from 6.24% to 8.71%. ^[1]

Part of the increase is exactly what childhood cancer advocates fought for.

The Childhood Cancer STAR Act and Childhood Cancer Data Initiative brought dedicated investments in tumor samples, connected data, survivorship research and other resources needed to study childhood cancers. ^[2]

Advocacy worked. Childhood cancer received greater federal investment.

But the yardstick changed, too.

The historic 4% came from an older reporting system that primarily counted projects specifically identified as childhood cancer research. It did not include some basic and cross-cutting science that could benefit children. ^[3]

Today, federal research categories are broader and overlap. A project studying a mutation found in several cancers, for example, may be counted as relevant to pediatric cancer, brain cancer and genomics. ^[4]

That gives us a fuller picture of research that could help children. It also means 4% and 8.7% are not measuring exactly the same thing.

The most accurate conclusion is this: The increase is real, but pediatric cancer funding did not double from 4% to 8.7%.

What do we know for certain?

The long-term trend is clear: Federal investment in childhood cancer increased through 2024.

However, that progress has slowed.

A National Academies analysis found that the purchasing power of overall pediatric research funding has largely leveled off since 2020. NCI’s total funding also remained flat in 2025. Once inflation and rising research costs are considered, the same number of dollars supports less work. ^[5]

So, both of these things are true:

• Childhood cancer funding increased substantially over the past decade.
• Its recent purchasing power has flattened.

What about childhood brain cancer?

Neither 4% nor 8.7% tells us how much federal funding reaches childhood brain cancer.

Brain tumors are the leading cause of cancer-related death in children, yet research faces several built-in disadvantages: ^[6]

• Childhood brain cancer is not one disease. It includes many tumor types and molecular subtypes, each competing for a portion of the larger pediatric cancer research pool.
• Patient populations are small. Researchers may need many hospitals, and sometimes multiple countries, to find enough children for a meaningful study or clinical trial. ^[7]
• The biology is especially difficult. Some tumors grow in areas where surgery is dangerous or impossible, and the blood-brain barrier can prevent medicines from reaching them. ^[8]
• Tumor samples can be limited. Without enough tissue to study, researchers have fewer opportunities to understand how a tumor grows or test possible treatments. ^[10]

The reporting makes the size of this gap difficult to measure. We don’t have the visibility into how much funding reaches DIPG, DMG, medulloblastoma, ependymoma and other childhood brain tumors.

What’s happening now?

The newest complete pediatric cancer figures are from 2024. They do not reflect the recent uncertainty.

Since 2025, federal research has faced terminated grants, delayed reviews, staffing disruptions and proposals for significant budget cuts. That includes the loss of federal funding for the Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium, a 26-year network that connected leading children’s hospitals and academic centers to early-phase brain tumor trials. Researchers planning studies that take years cannot easily work around this level of disruption.

A grant delayed or lost today can mean an experiment postponed, a researcher leaving the field or a clinical trial opening later. Those effects may not appear in federal spending reports for years.

So, what comes next?

There is real progress here. Advocacy increased childhood cancer’s place in the federal research portfolio, built stronger research infrastructure and made it easier for scientists to share data and tumor samples.

But children with aggressive brain cancers are still waiting for that federal progress to reach them.

The Cure Starts Now helps close that gap by funding research directly and strategically, giving childhood brain cancer research a steady foundation. Without waiting for the government, we have helped build an international registry, connected researchers through our symposium, and expanded this work around the world.

We focus on some of the hardest-to-treat childhood brain cancers, searching for discoveries that could unlock progress across many cancers.

That’s the Homerun Cure strategy: start with the cancers where children have the fewest options, connect researchers around the world and fund the ideas with the potential to change what comes next.

Federal funding remains essential. So does our ability to say yes when promising research is ready to move but funding is not. We have built the network, infrastructure and funding strategy to keep it moving, and that is exactly what we will continue to do.