The National Cancer Institute, the federal research agency charged with leading the war against the nation\u2019s second-largest killer, is studying ivermectin as a potential cancer treatment, according to its top official.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere are enough reports of it, enough interest in it, that we actually did \u2014 ivermectin, in particular \u2014 did engage in sort of a better preclinical study of its properties and its ability to kill cancer cells,\u201d said Anthony Letai, a physician the Trump administration appointed as NCI director in September.<\/p>\n
Letai did not cite new evidence that might have prompted the institute to research the effectiveness of the antiparasitic drug against cancer. The drug, largely used to treat people or animals for infections caused by parasites, is a popular dewormer for horses.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ll probably have those results in a few months,\u201d Letai said. \u201cSo we are taking it seriously.\u201d<\/p>\n
He spoke about ivermectin at a Jan. 30 event, \u201cReclaiming Science: The People\u2019s NIH,\u201d with National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya and other senior agency officials at Washington, D.C.\u2019s Willard Hotel. The MAHA Institute hosted the discussion, framed by the \u201cMake America Healthy Again\u201d agenda of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The National Cancer Institute is the largest of the NIH\u2019s 27 branches.<\/p>\n
During the covid pandemic, ivermectin\u2019s popularity surged as fringe medical groups promoted it as an effective treatment. Clinical trials<\/a> have found<\/a> it isn\u2019t effective against covid.<\/p>\n Ivermectin has become a symbol of resistance against the medical establishment among MAHA adherents and conservatives. Like-minded commentators and wellness and other online influencers have hyped \u2014 without evidence \u2014 ivermectin as a miracle cure for a host of diseases, including cancer. Trump officials have pointed to research on ivermectin as an example of the administration\u2019s receptiveness to ideas the scientific establishment has rejected.<\/p>\n \u201cIf lots of people believe it and it\u2019s moving public health, we as NIH have an obligation, again, to treat it seriously,\u201d Bhattacharya said at the event. According to The Chronicle<\/a> at Duke University, Bhattacharya recently said he wants the NIH to be \u201cthe research arm of MAHA.\u201d<\/p>\n The decision by the world\u2019s premier cancer research institute to study ivermectin as a cancer treatment has alarmed career scientists at the agency.<\/p>\n \u201cI am shocked and appalled,\u201d one NCI scientist said. \u201cWe are moving funds away from so much promising research in order to do a preclinical study based on nonscientific ideas. It\u2019s absurd.\u201d<\/p>\n KFF Health News granted the scientist and other NCI workers anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the press and fear retaliation.<\/p>\n HHS and the National Cancer Institute did not answer KFF Health News\u2019 questions on the amount of money the cancer institute is spending on the study, who is carrying it out, and whether there was new evidence that prompted NCI to look into ivermectin as an anticancer therapy. Emily Hilliard, an HHS spokesperson, said NIH is dedicated to \u201crigorous, gold-standard research,\u201d something the administration has repeatedly professed.<\/p>\n A preclinical study is an early phase of research conducted in a lab to test whether a drug or treatment may be useful and to assess potential harms. These studies take place before human clinical trials.<\/p>\n The scientist questioned whether there is enough initial evidence to warrant NCI\u2019s spending of taxpayer funds to investigate the drug\u2019s potential as a cancer treatment.<\/p>\n The FDA has approved ivermectin for certain uses in humans and animals. Tablets are used to treat conditions caused by parasitic worms, and the FDA has approved ivermectin lotions to treat lice and rosacea. Two scientists involved in its discovery won the Nobel Prize in 2015<\/a>, tied to the drug\u2019s success in treating certain parasitic diseases.<\/p>\n The FDA has warned<\/a> that large doses of ivermectin can be dangerous. Overdoses can cause seizures, comas, or death.<\/p>\n Kennedy, supporters of the MAHA movement, and some conservative commentators have promoted the idea that the government and pharmaceutical companies quashed ivermectin and other inexpensive, off-patent drugs because they\u2019re not profitable for the drug industry.<\/p>\n \u201cFDA\u2019s war on public health is about to end,\u201d Kennedy wrote in an October 2024 X post<\/a> that has since gone viral. \u201cThis includes its aggressive suppression of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals and anything else that advances human health and can\u2019t be patented by Pharma.\u201d<\/p>\n Previous laboratory research has shown<\/a> that ivermectin could have anticancer effects because it promotes cell death and inhibits the growth of tumor cells. \u201cIt actually has been studied both with NIH funds and outside of NIH funds,\u201d Letai said.<\/p>\n However, there is no evidence that ivermectin is safe and effective in treating cancer in humans. Preliminary data<\/a> from a small clinical trial that gave ivermectin to patients with one type of metastatic breast cancer, in combination with immunotherapy, found no significant benefit from the addition of ivermectin.<\/p>\n Some physicians are concerned that patients will delay or forgo effective cancer treatments, or be harmed in other ways, if they believe unfounded claims that ivermectin can treat their disease.<\/p>\n \u201cMany, many, many things work in a test tube. Quite a few things work in a mouse or a monkey. It still doesn\u2019t mean it\u2019s going to work in people,\u201d said Jeffery Edenfield, executive medical director of oncology for the South Carolina-based Prisma Health Cancer Institute.<\/p>\n Edenfield said cancer patients ask him about ivermectin \u201cregularly,\u201d mostly because of what they see on social media. He said he persuaded a patient to stop using it, and a colleague recently had a patient who decided \u201cto forgo highly effective standard therapy in favor of ivermectin.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cPeople come to the discussion having largely already made up their mind,\u201d Edenfield said.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re in this delicate time when there\u2019s sort of a fundamental mistrust of medicine,\u201d he added. \u201cSome people are just not going to believe me. I just have to keep trying.\u201d<\/p>\n A June letter<\/a> by clinicians at Cincinnati Children\u2019s Hospital Medical Center in Ohio detailed how an adolescent patient with metastatic bone cancer started taking ivermectin \u201cafter encountering social media posts touting its benefits.\u201d The patient \u2014 who hadn\u2019t been given a prescription by a clinician \u2014 experienced ivermectin-related neurotoxicity and had to seek emergency care because of nausea, fatigue, and other symptoms.<\/p>\n \u201cWe urge the pediatric oncology community to advocate for sensible health policy that prioritizes the well-being of our patients,\u201d the clinicians wrote.<\/p>\n The lack of evidence about ivermectin and cancer hasn\u2019t stopped celebrities and online influencers from promoting the notion that the drug is a cure-all. On a January 2025 episode of Joe Rogan\u2019s podcast, actor Mel Gibson claimed that a combination of drugs that included ivermectin cured three friends with stage 4 cancer. The episode has been viewed more than 12 million times.<\/p>\n Lawmakers in a handful of states have made the drug available over the counter. And Florida \u2014 which, under Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, has become a hotbed for anti-vaccine policies<\/a> and the spread of public health misinformation \u2014 announced last fall that the state plans to fund research to study the drug as a potential cancer treatment<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Florida Department of Health did not respond to questions about that effort.<\/p>\n Letai, previously a Dana-Farber Cancer Institute oncologist, started at the National Cancer Institute after months of upheaval<\/a> caused by Trump administration policies.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat you\u2019re hearing at the NIH now is an openness to ideas \u2014 even ideas that scientists would say, \u2018Oh, there\u2019s no way it could work\u2019 \u2014 but nevertheless applying rigorous scientific methods to those ideas,\u201d Bhattacharya said at the Jan. 30 event.<\/p>\n A second NCI scientist, who was granted anonymity due to fear of retaliation, said the notion that NIH was not open to investigating the value of off-label drugs in cancer is \u201cridiculous.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis is not a new idea they came up with,\u201d the scientist said.<\/p>\n Letai didn\u2019t elaborate on whether NCI scientists are conducting the research or if it has directed funding to an outside institution. Three-quarters of the cancer institute\u2019s research dollars go to outside scientists.<\/p>\n He also aimed to temper expectations.<\/p>\n \u201cAt least on a population level,\u201d Letai said, \u201cit\u2019s not going to be a cure-all for cancer.\u201d<\/p>\n\n KFF Health News<\/a> is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF\u2014an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF<\/a>.<\/p>\nUSE OUR CONTENT<\/h3>\n