Event Archive 2012
Funding for Startups from the National Cancer Institute
Dr. Gregory Evans visited the WBBA on October 18, 2012 to speak about funding opportunities for small businesses from the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Dr. Evans is Program Director and Team Leader at the NCI's SBIR Development Center. In his talk (slides linked here), he highlighted current contract opportunities with specific topic solicitations (DUE DATE November 13), Phase IIB Bridge Awards for current grantees seeking additional commercialization support (DUE DATES November 6th & March 6), and imminent rule changes included in the Congressional reauthorization of the SBIR program (see slides for details). Some of the take home messages from Dr. Evans's talk are highlighted here:
- SBIR contracts are different from grants - see slides for how they vary. In contrast to grant RFPs, the NCI solicits contract applications only ONCE per year!
- For grants, call the NCI SBIR Development Office and speak to them about your application - often the office's staff will be asked to supplement scoring information by recommending which proposals should be funded!
- Early stage companies should focus on one high quality, targeted application, versus multiple proposals for various products.
- There are valuable supplemental programs for grantees that support commercialization efforts - ie., the Niche Assessment Program (NAP); the Commercialization Assistance Program, and additional clinical and specimen resources. Many of these programs have participant caps and due dates, so be aware and take advantage of them!
- New rules will include hard caps on SBIR awards - how these hard caps will be dealt with by each of the NIH institutes remains to be seen, so keep up on announcements and implementation.
The NCI SBIR Development Office is open to your feedback and questions - contact information can be found in the slides and can also be found here.
Did you attend the event? Is there anything you want to add? Please fill out our feedback survey!
The Biopharmaceutical Marketplace 2012
Recap by Stephanie Miller
Biotechnology research leaders, pharmaceutical developers and manufacturers, healthcare professionals, investors, and insurance providers gathered at the Washington State Convention Center for a discussion of the future of the biopharmaceutical industry in the post-Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) healthcare marketplace.
WBBA President Chris Rivera and Dr. Pete Fullerton of Strategic Pharmacy Innovations opened the dialogue, highlighting the challenges and opportunities the industry will face in what they called “a new era.” A shift in the definition of value, combined with a complex financial and political situation and an evolving market, dominated the themes of the day. (Fullerton slides available here)
Keys to defining the “value” of newly developed medical products:
- High clinical and humanistic reward
- High financial benefit
- Affordability of product
- Agreement with regulatory requirements
Dr. David Flum, a UW surgeon and a member of the Methodology Committee of the newly-formed federal Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), provided insight into the informed healthcare standards that PCORI is in the process of designing. (Slides available here.) Additionally, Dr. Chad Murphy of Premera Blue Cross (pictured at left) discussed the emerging decision-making process for drug coverage and access within healthcare plans.
Emerging values of payers:
- Greater emphasis on patient reported outcomes
- Shift from small molecule drugs to biologics
- Consideration for unmet needs, orphan diseases, and ethical issues
- Reliance on comparative effectiveness over placebo controls to determine drug efficacy
- Plea for more realistic measures of clinical success of a drug
- Early and continued communication between developers, regulatory agencies, marketers, and payers
- Greater likelihood of collaborative access to data
Fritz Bittenbender, VP of Alliance Development at the national Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), discussed the decision-making factors behind public policy, citing growths in life science employment and a positive perception of the field as the biggest strengths of the biopharmaceutical industry. (Slides available here) However, Dr. Michael del Aguila of Genentech (left - slides available here) and Dr. Donna Murray of ZymoGenetics (below - slides available here) presented some difficulties their companies face, commenting on the complexity of gaining and maintaining approval for a product in the national arena and on the global scale, respectively.
Strengths and opportunities for life sciences companies:
- Continued growth in life science jobs despite recession and in contrast to other private sector trends
- Positive public and investor perception of life science industry and the products it creates
- Trend toward more informed healthcare decisions due to PCORI standards
- Expected flood of demand for products in 2014 after health insurance requirement
- Predicted increased demand for better diagnostic tools and assays
Weaknesses and challenges to the industry:
- Industry has become the “pay for” for congress
- Uncertainty of the future of the PPACA
- Sparse funding for early-stage research
- Financial and temporal burden to garner FDA approval
- Complexity and variability in drug approval standards for different countries
- Insufficiency of FDA approval as a predictor of product success
As the audience communicated concerns of stifled innovation and market downturns, Rivera remained positive. He described the future of the biopharmaceutical industry, and in particular that driven by the combined strengths of the life science community in Washington State, as being uniquely positioned for success and balanced “co-opetition.”
About the Author: Stephanie Miller is a graduate student in Bioengineering at the University of Washington.
WBBA/LSDF Open House
With our largest crowd to date for our 4th Annual Open House event, WBBA and LSDF welcomed 260+ people to the spacious outdoor deck at 1551 Eastlake. It was a treat to welcome so many life science leaders, legislators, LSDF grantees, and South Lake Union neighbors over to the building we began occupying in December of 2011. Thank you to our sponsor, Ernst & Young, for supporting this annual event. Haven’t seen our fabulous deck or the Agora Conference Center event space? Pop over and visit us; we enjoy showing off our “new” space.
WBBA Life Sciences Day with Sounders FB
Scarves up! Our first ever Life Sciences Day at the Sounders FC was a resounding hit! With upward of 75 tickets sold, we had quite the Life Sciences contingent represented. Add in those who were already attending the game and we had close to 100 at our welcoming reception. With this great success, we’re working on partnerships with the Seahawks and the Mariners – so stay tuned for more sports-themed events in the future!
WBBA Golf Invitational
More than 100 golfers enjoyed sunshine, good golf, good food and good beer at WBBA’s 8th Annual Golf Invitational on August 13. It was a perfect golf day at Fairwood Golf & Country Club in Renton. This annual WBBA event is our only event which raises money for WBBA’s political action committee, BIOPAC. Our BIOPAC helps raise our voice in Olympia.
Thank you to our exceptional sponsors.
Congratulations to the prize winners:
- Women’s Longest Drive: Alexandra Kroft
- Men’s Longest Drive: Justin Taylor
- Women’s Closest to the Pin: Lisa Reshaur
- Men’s Closest to the Pin: Darryl Simurdack
- Best Foursome: Marc Cummings, Nick Johnson, Terry Johnson and Chris Rivera
- Second Place Foursome: Bryan Bogden, Mark Davis, Roger O’Brien and Justin Taylor
- Third Place Foursome: Kevin Baldwin, Krista Dalton, Randall Hopkins and Brian Quinn
- Last Place Foursome: Brian Blackman, Teri Foy, Ryan Kelley and Kurt Lustig
Life Science Innovation Northwest
For the first time in the history of the conference, Life Science Innovation Northwest was held in July. It was a great success! There were a lot of other “firsts” this year including: Wi-Fi throughout the conference (thanks to our generous Wi-Fi sponsor, K&L Gates); our first ever LSINW hashtag that gleaned us 393 tweets, 386 uses of the hashtag #LSINW, and 58 re-tweets; and we unveiled our first LSINW volunteer uniform – the lab coat!
We were also able to double our exhibit area, provide 1:1 BioPartnering meetings in just one room, secure fantastic keynote presenters (Jeff Raikes and G. Steven Burrill), and offer nearly 80 podium presentations for our first summertime meeting.
We hope you will join us again next year in July at the Washington State Convention Center on July 10-11, 2013. Further details will be coming to the website very soon! Stay tuned.
P4 Medicine Summit
Recap by Renuka Ramanathan
The systems biology approach to medicine, albeit a daunting challenge to execute, is simple in concept: first collect many, many data points (I mean millions and billions), understand how these points are connected, realize the dynamics of how they connect, and finally develop an understanding of function. Dr. Leroy Hood, President and co-founder of the Institute for Systems Biology (ISB), gave the keynote speech at the P4 Medicine Summit in McCaw Hall at Seattle Center. “Imagine how we would go about understanding a radio,” he paused. First, we would need to make a parts list and understand how each part worked individually. Then we would need to put the parts together in circuits. Finally, we would perturb the circuits to understand its reactions and behaviors. Health can be viewed as networks of networks. And diseases can be viewed as “disease-perturbed” networks. In other words, the altered bits of information produced by disease are the signatures of perturbations to health. Harnessing the digital revolution will allow institutes and organizations like ISB to mine populations for large amounts of digitized health information and search for these signatures of perturbations to health. Dr. Hood advocates that scientists will be able to leverage these large data pools using the power of computing, clever synthetic chemistry, and biology to develop better diagnostics and identify new drug targets, ultimately ushering in the era of P4 medicine.
P4 medicine is predictive, preventive, personalized, and participatory. The ultimate vision lies 10 years from now. Hood believes that in the future, everyone will have his or her genome sequenced. This will allow for a predictive approach to medicine. Many people hear “sequencing the genome” and solely regard it as a way to find genes that are a marker of disease. This is an easy mistake to make. The most salient part of Dr. Hood’s talk was this point: the highly critical aspect of sequencing the genome will be the identification of “actionable” genes. These are genes that can be modulated and are targets for pushing a person towards wellness rather than disease. Predictive medicine will not simply include forecasting disease propensity, but more importantly, predicting the ability to move one’s health towards wellness. The systems approach to medicine will be integral in identifying new drug targets. These drug targets will not only be avenues of altering disease-perturbed networks, but will also focus on avenues that push health towards wellness. In this way, P4 medicine will be preventative. Patients will control their own data analysis. Medical care and choices will be guided by the patient in a personalized approach to considering health. And finally, P4 medicine will be participatory – it will require patient-driven social networks to advance a new approach to medical care.
Dr. Hood mentioned the success of ISB – the institute has spun off 5 companies, one of which was an accelerator that had a hand in starting 12 more companies. It is an “engine of innovation,” and certainly it has inspired many more companies to adopt systems approach to biology and medicine. The three proceeding talks were given by Presidents and CEOs of companies that capture the core values and methods of the P4 approach to medicine. (Slides available here)
Dean Sproles, Chairman and CEO of Iverson Genetic Diagnostics, Inc. and a member of ISB, spoke first. Iverson focuses on technologies that examine gene expression as affected by various drugs. One example was the Warfarin genetic test that was developed to improve Warfarin dosing for individual patients, reducing the risk of bleeding events and optimizing efficacy. Currently the company is focused on identifying genes associated with increased risk of cancer development for women taking hormone replacement therapy. (Slides available here)
Dr. Albert A. Luderer, CEO and Board Member of Integrated Diagnostics spoke about using systems biology for the development of non-invasive clinical diagnostics. Integrated Diagnostics has pioneered work with lung nodules, a potentially malignant sign of lung cancer. Medical decisions for patients with lung nodules are currently made by invasive methods that evaluate the size of the nodule. Above a certain cutoff, patients are recommended for surgery. Below a certain cutoff, patients are recommended to wait a few years and evaluate growth. But, between the range of 0.8 and 2 cm is an area of treatment uncertainty. Integrated Diagnostics used a systems biology approach to mine a large population of people for a panel of reliably measurable blood proteins that indicate a difference between benign and malignant nodules. Using the power of computing, they initially identified 300 relevant blood proteins and homed in on a few that accurately predicted lung nodule malignancies. Moreover, apart from the science, Dr. Luderer pointed out that the incorporation of such a diagnostic to inform treatment decisions of lung nodules will result in an average savings of $1 per person per plan year – that’s an average of $40 million saved in the whole population. (Slides available here)
The talks ended with Brad Gary, President and CEO of NanoString Technologies. NanoString is known for its development and commercialization of the “nCounter Analysis System” – a way to visualize and count single molecules of nucleic acid to carry out gene expression profiling. The digital and quantitative readouts of NanoString’s technologies enable it to be applied to a large array of in vitro diagnostics. One example is the use of the nCounter Analysis System to reduce overtreatment and mistreatment in breast cancer by using gene expression profiling to stratify the disease into different subtypes. These stratifications will better inform treatment decisions, such as evaluating the suitability of chemotherapy versus radiation therapy as well as the choice of chemotherapeutic agents. (Slides available here)
These three companies highlight the interdisciplinary nature of medicine that Dr. Hood advocates for. It is the convergence of computing, chemistry, and biology that can be leveraged to solve health problems and ultimately promote wellness. P4 medicine is very much a reality, and it’s a reality that is charging its way into our society right now. Everyone has heard of genetic tests for disease, but few know the true impacts P4 medicine can have. Apart from identifying “actionable” genes and promoting wellness, Hood recognized the important societal ramifications of P4 medicine. The digitalization of medicine will transform and democratize healthcare, the “wellness” industry has the potential to generate significant wealth, and P4 approaches to diagnostics has the ability to improve healthcare costs. Though grandiose, the vision of a future in P4 medicine is rooted in the creation of biologically driven technologies, which have the potential to revolutionize the way physicians, researchers, and scientists approach medicine. For more information on P4 medicine, visit p4mi.org.
An added note: at the beginning of the summit, it was announced that Governor Chris Gregoire paid tribute to Dr. Hood's work by declaring June 21 "Personalized Medicine Awareness Day" in the state of Washington. The proclamation, in part, reads "leaders in Washington state, like genomics pioneer Dr. Leroy Hood, and Washington's thriving life sciences sector are leading the way in making personalized medicine a reality in lifetime."
About the author: Renuka Ramanathan is a Bioengineering Graduate Student at UW working on designing new biomaterials to modulate mucosal immunity. She is also a member of the UW Science & Engineering Business Association (SEBA).
Sustainable Science Forum
Recap by Renuka Ramanathan
Science is a fickle beast and scientists can be picky people. We long to solve complex problems, tackle big issues, and invent new technologies. And most of all: we would love to work with unlimited resources. This, of course, isn’t the reality, and life science-based organizations have grown to become one of the largest generators of waste and one of the highest consumers of energy, globally. The WBBA Sustainable Science event focused on identifying ways to improve clean science practices in the biotech industry. Elizabeth Scallon, Operations Manager at VLST, kicked off the seminar by remarking that sustainable science will only be achieved by approaching the issue from a systems perspective. Scallon concluded her talk by introducing 6 areas, which together can address clean science in life science companies: designing, building, making, operating, sustaining, and incentivizing. (Slides available here)
Bob Vizenor from SAB Architects spoke next on designing sustainable facilities for life science companies. Vizenor noted a few interesting facts about how wasteful a science facility can be if designed poorly. For example, the average science facility uses five times as much energy as a typical office building. This increase in energy consumption is due to the use of 100% outside air systems, separate water systems that are constantly in use, and the high density of equipment that often have redundant systems as fail-safe mechanisms. Perhaps the most important point Vizenor made was that science is a 24/7/365 endeavor. For facilities that aren’t cleverly designed, this usually means that buildings, equipment, and lab processes are always “on.” SAB Architects is focused on designing facilities that incorporate smart solutions to tackle sustainable science right at the design level.(Slides available here)
James Jenkins of BNBuilders, a West coast contractor, talked next about building facilities that incorporate these smart design solutions for clean science facilities. Jenkins explained BNBuilders’ focus on life cycle analysis of a wide range of processes, from the impact of manufacturing a piece of equipment to transportation costs. These analyses are carried out using building information modeling to assess energy, cost and operational efficiencies. (Slides available here)
Mike Moran, the Sustainability Program Manager of PNNL (a DOE Office of Science Laboratory), spoke about operating green. From an operations standpoint, Moran has assessed a laboratory home to 4700 staff, 2 million square feet of facilities and generating $1.1 billion per year in sales. How does PNNL address sustainability on such a large scale? Moran spoke about the “triple bottom line”: environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and economic prosperity. Improving each of these three areas can vastly impact the success of operating green. One example Moran gave was the ChemAgain program implemented at PNNL. This program reduced chemical waste by putting any surplus of chemicals generated in one facility back into circulation and productive use by researchers in a different facility within PNNL. (Slides available here)
Mickey Blake, CEO, President, and Founder of Mt. Baker Bio, addressed the topic of Making Green solutions for life science companies. Blake pointed out that the life sciences industry is one of the largest waste producers, globally. Blake gave examples of greener chemistries and resource recovery such as the design of better chemical containers as strategies to make green solutions. Blake also advocated for more robust quantification and metrics that would help assess the impact of these green solutions. (Slides available here)
The Executive Director of Ingenium, Gary Lundstedt, discussed strategies for sustaining green operations. Lundstedt mainly spoke on the issue of addressing waste before it’s generated. “Burn or bury” is a thing of the past; the solution to managing today’s waste generation will be to use the “triple bottom rule” to guide rules and regulations for sustaining greener technologies. (Slides available here)
The talks ended with Charlie Cunniff from the City of Seattle discussing ways to incentivize clean science initiatives. Perhaps the most important facet of clean science will be financing the change. Current ways of managing energy consumption and waste generation are so cost efficient and ingrained that people will need clear incentives to shift towards going green. Seattle City Light and Puget Sound Energy offer rebates and incentives, and Cunniff commented on the aggressive programs the city is working on to offer clean energy efficiently. (Slides available here)
The overall message of today’s talks was to outline a systems approach to clean science initiatives. But the biggest barriers to clean science will always be getting folks to buy-in. Has this science researcher bought in? Certainly. With the massive healthcare burdens facing our generation and the explosion of biotech companies eager to research, invent, and market solutions – ensuring that these companies and labs will not in the process generate environmental burdens is a major concern. Clean science initiatives will be an integral part of making sure the life sciences stays conscientious and green.
To stay informed and participate in Clean Science initiatives, check out the WBBA’s LinkedIn Clean Science Group.
About the author: Renuka Ramanathan is a Bioengineering Graduate Student at UW working on designing new biomaterials to modulate mucosal immunity. She is also a member of the UW Science & Engineering Business Association (SEBA).
Planning for Your Drug Development Success - From Bench to Clinic
Recap by Cindy Wu
This event was attended by employees from the pharmaceutical and biotech industry, as well as UW graduate students. Experts from these industries gave presentations to discuss some of the common pitfalls of small start-up companies involved in drug development. A discussion panel with the speakers followed afterwards. Virtually all of the speakers highlighted many of the common reasons why billions of dollars are being spent in developing drugs, yet the number of new drugs being introduced to the market annually has not seen much of an increase. This inefficiency is a bigger problem with start-ups since lesser resources are available compared to larger drug companies. However, a key advantage of small companies is that they can go past bureaucratic barriers on decision-making much easier.
Many of the problems that start-ups encounter are the following:
• Failing at the phase 1 stage because of toxicity issues or manufacturing difficulties (i.e. impurities)
• Not designing the right studies suitable for the compound of interest, or doing “nice-to-know” studies that may be irrelevant to the overall development plan
• Not incorporating enough technical or non-commercial decision making
• Creating an environment where too many people are trying to lead, or in contrast, not enough people want
• Directly repeating a study instead of re-designing parts of it when results were unexpected (but not necessarily wrong)
• Poorly executing or inartfully interpreting non-clinical studies
To avoid these issues, some tips are:
• Have solid intellectual property, not just a “good idea”
• Design Phase 1 studies to also look at some efficacy, not just toxicity
• Establish clear, rational regulatory reasons and/or motivations for doing something
• Be sure that decisions should benefit the company as a whole
• Avoid blaming and panic
• Make expectations reasonable
• Avoid letting the advisory board make specific, technical decisions
• Don’t be on auto-pilot - stay involved with the research team
• Conduct studies appropriate for the drug
• Maintain GLPs (good laboratory practices)
Slides from all presenters are available for download here.
Ultrasound Innovation in Washington
Recap by Cindy Wu
Bright and early on April 10, 2012, WBBA hosted the first annual Ultrasound Innovation in Washington event led by Justin Reed, Managing Director of UWAMIT. Speaking of firsts, this was the first public event hosted by WBBA in the Agora Room at their new office that overlooks Lake Union on Eastlake. The Life Sciences Discovery Fund (LSDF), some emerging life science companies, and the WBBA live under the same roof at this new location.
It’s not often that people get to travel back in time. This morning, WBBA offered the leaders of Seattle biotech a rare chance to explore the past, present, and future of Ultrasound Innovation in the very place the fundamentals of ultrasound were pioneered. Don Baker, co-founder of ATL and ultrasound pioneer at UW, spoke about the vision, faith, confidence, and perseverance of the team that worked alongside him in the 1950s as pioneers building the novel and innovative technology we now call ultrasound, initially borne out of the grand challenge to non-invasively elucidate and describe cardiovascular physiology and anatomy. Many take ultrasound technology for granted today, just like many take for granted digital computers. Don and the team at UW made the first strides in the field without the help of digital computers. Remarkably, all initial computing was done using analog hardware. By bringing together the best and brightest engineers, physicians, basic biological scientists, and technicians, Don and his colleagues were able to achieve the inconceivable. (Slides available here.)
Following Don Baker’s keynote were presentations on the latest technologies and products of featured established companies including:
Larry Crum, PhD, Founding Director of the Center for Industrial and Medical Ultrasound and Founder of UST gave a detailed overview of the initial research grants, many awarded from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), that enabled research leading to multiple company spin-outs from UW. Larry himself led many of these start-ups including Therus/AcousTx, Ultrasound Technologies, and EKOS Corporation among others. (Slides available here.)
We were then joined by four emerging company featured presentations by the following executives:
Matt O’Donnell, PhD, Dean of UW College of Engineering, presented the Future of Ultrasound with an analogy to cruise control where Ultrasound will focus increasingly on remote sensing and remote actuation. Research in high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is leading to advances in gene delivery, drug delivery, and remote manipulation of the internal anatomy. Another area Matt covered was molecular sensing, where researchers will be able to conduct in vivo molecular assays giving real-time molecular imaging. Another technology, “acoustic fluorescence,” opens up a new field for assays that absorb light instead of produce light. Using targeted photoacoustic imaging, researchers in this field are starting to develop new intracellular probes that track inflammation in all stages of atherosclerosis and show inflammatory biomarkers on individual cells. (Slides available here.)
From “t=0” until now, ultrasound technology has gone through many pivots and branched into new technologies that were seemingly impossible decades ago. With the increased accessibility, lowered cost, and increased interest in research and development, the ultrasound industry is just beginning to blossom. When WBBA revisits Ultrasound in Washington for the second annual event next spring we should expect our local researchers and companies to report on exciting advances that increase the reach and impact of ultrasound technologies globally in the lab and in the clinic.
About the author: Cindy Wu is a UW student, member of the Science & Engineering Business Association (SEBA), and Co-founder and President of Microryza, a new Seattle start-up that's changing the way academic research is funded and shared with the public.
Thank you to our sponsors:
NeuroNEXT at Swedish Neuroscience Institute
Recap by Cindy Wu
Seattle leaders and researchers streamed into the Swedish Education and Conference Center ready to hear about the latest programs NeuroNEXT has in store. Before convening for the presentations attendees conversed over hors d’oeuvres, toured the Seattle Science Foundation to examine state-of-the-art biomedical educational tools, and spoke with the founders of young biotech companies including Empowering Engineering Technologies and Impel Neuropharama.
With a warm welcome from WBBA President Chris Rivera, Marc Mayberg, Chief Medical Director of Swedish Neuroscience Institute (SNI) took the stage introducing how NeuroNEXT and SNI bring together the global leaders in neurology and neurosurgery. SNI is providing new cutting edge clinical care focused on using a multidisciplinary approach to bring innovative technologies to their patients. (Slides available for download here.)
John Henson, NeuroNEXT at SNI Program Director and Associate Chief Medical Director at SNI, introduced the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and explained how NINDS aims to expedite the development of drug agents and new medical devices. (Slides available for download here.) Elizabeth McNeil, Scientific Program Director of NeuroNEXT at NINDS joined the group live over Skype from NIH with a short introduction and answered questions from the audience. In addition to the traditional U01 or small business grant, NeuroNEXT is offering a new non-traditional approach for funding new neurological ventures called the Resource Access Award (X01) which allows industry access to NeuroNEXT infrastructure with pre-existing master trial agreements for all 25 sites nationwide. (Slides available for download here.)
NeuroNEXT is investing in innovative ideas, facilitating collaboration and multidisciplinary approaches in research, and expediting the impact of translational research by bringing the technologies of the lab into the clinic. It is a special mechanism to foster collaboration between the government and private/public partnerships to decrease the time and cost associated with clinical trials for novel central nervous system therapies. There is a central IRB approval process to gain access to all of the 25 sites included in the NeuroNEXT infrastructure, and pathways to accelerate trials and combine Phase I/II trials if healthy volunteers are not usable.
Ryder Gwinn, Director of Epilepsy and Functional Neurosugery at SNI, enlightened the crowd with new commercialized technologies from SNI. NeuroPace is a device that monitors ongoing brain activity, detects early warning signs of seizures, and intervenes with stimulation to lessen the severity and manifestation of the seizure. Nevro Corporation is designing an advanced new device that uses a novel form of spinal cord stimulation to treat back and leg pain. Lastly, Ryder introduced a new seizure prediction device called NeuroVista that increases the quality of life for patients suffering from epilepsy. (Slides available for download here.)
About the author: Cindy Wu is a UW student, member of the Science & Engineering Business Association (SEBA), and Co-founder and President of Microryza
Return to top