HB3873, the “Knock Out Cancer Act” or “KO Cancer Act,” would increase federal support for cancer research at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and require a federal study of cancer drug shortages. The bill’s findings emphasize that cancer remains a leading cause of death, that earlier detection and scientific research improve outcomes, and that the NCI has historically driven major medical breakthroughs. To address those concerns, the bill would appropriate to the NCI for fiscal years 2026 through 2030 an amount equal to 25 percent of the total amount appropriated to the NCI for fiscal year 2022, in addition to any other funds otherwise available.
Impact
The bill would directly affect federal appropriations law by creating a mandatory, multi-year funding stream for the National Cancer Institute, with the money drawn from Treasury funds not otherwise appropriated and made available until expended. It would also direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services, through the FDA Commissioner, to study the causes of cancer drug shortages and submit a report to Congress within one year, including recommendations to address shortages. If enacted, it would increase federal cancer research funding and add a new reporting requirement on drug supply issues affecting cancer patients and manufacturers.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears strongly supportive of cancer research and patient access concerns, with a bipartisan presentation from its sponsors, Rep. Fitzpatrick and Rep. Dingell. The findings frame the bill as a response to the high mortality burden of cancer and the need for more robust research investment. No committee debate or recorded votes were provided, so there is no evidence of organized opposition in the available materials.
Contention
The main policy questions likely concern the size and structure of the funding increase, since the bill would set NCI funding at a fixed share tied to fiscal year 2022 appropriations rather than through the normal annual appropriations process. Another possible point of contention is the federal spending commitment over multiple years, especially because the funds would be mandatory and additional to existing appropriations. The drug-shortage study could also draw scrutiny over whether shortages are best addressed through FDA review, supply-chain reforms, generic and biosimilar competition, or broader market interventions.