Present: Marianne Burke, Nancy Gell, Kairn Kelley, Ben
Littenberg, Adam Sprouse-Blum, Connie van Eeghen
Start Up: Ferroequinologist is a train
buff – who knew?
1.
Discussion: Adam’s
presentation on Gastroparesis in Migraine (when the stomach doesn’t work during
a migraine headache)
a. Adam
is giving a talk to Headache Cooperative New England, in Stowe VT, next
Saturday. Feedback on presentation:
i.
Were Kaufman and Levine (1934) doctors?
ii.
Historical overview
1. State
the nature of the measure (3rd item in the history slide): venous
serum level
a. Consider
a heading “Serum drug levels”
2. “Measure
gastric emptying” – don’t explain “impedance”
a. Don’t
explain scintigraphy either
iii.
Hypothesis: induce gastroparesis in transgenic mice
iv.
Box plot header for 15 minute wait: 45 minutes (how
long waited for Nitroglycerin to work) – different than the 15 minute wait for
gastric emptying
1. Distance
traveled into small intestine: more likely the mode, rather than the mean
v.
4 hour results – no difference
b. Questions:
i.
Why are these results different (limitations)
1. Mice
are not people
2. Migraine
is a symptom; the mouse model of migraine is based on transplanting a human
gene in a mouse – we don’t know if the mouse is having migraine
3. Inadequate
nitro dose
4. Maybe
waited too long; too short
5. Did
not test mice for pain reaction
a. Check
to see if the assays done are done in these kinds of mice
6. Might
have gotten migraine-resistant mice, despite gene
ii.
State up front: why did we go into this
iii.
What was learned:
1. Personal
a. Learned
skills (animals, bench research)
b. Knowledge
base
c. Connections
with labs
d. Tie
in to other studies
2. Big
picture
a. Publication
of negative studies is important
i.
It is also an incomplete study:
1. GastroP
was not ruled out
2. Can’t
measure it in 5 mice using this method
iv.
What’s next?
1. Which
is the cause: M to GP or GP to M
2. Human
study with nanotrackers
a. Trackers
anchored in the stomach until the migraine starts (talk to Jim Vecchio)
3. GastroP
just may not be that fruitful in an animal models
v.
What else can be said?
1. What
is the research question?
a. What
can be done about Migraine symptoms?
b. What
are the possible treatments?
c. Can
an animal model simulate the symptom to allow us to measure it?
2. What
is the logic model that resulted in the hypothesis?
3. What
do you want people to leave with? From
that message, back into the presentation.
a. “GP
is a big problem in migraine. They are
associated. (History) An animal model would be great, we tried to
build one, here’s how. Looking for other
ways to build; ideas? Considering other
ways to get to this idea: big data study, human studies with techno-support,
GCRC (inpatient or outpatient) study on whether stomach dilation = gastric
emptying…”
vi.
Summarize the historical piece down to the basics: this
is real phenomenon
1. What
method?
a. We
know that an animal model doesn’t work.
2. Or,
move the historical piece into a consolidated story, not a list of anecdotes
a. Add
pictures of those researchers
b. Make
sure all pictures are connected to the story
3. Provide
statistics, supporting why this is important
4. Remember
that the outcome measure for the animal study is a completely different, and
possibly better, measure
vii.
First slide: add investigators, add funder
c. Tips
for platform talks:
i.
White background is good
ii.
Check out the podium ahead of time: wires, controls,
steps
iii.
Use the digital pointer, not the laser
a.
March 31, 2016: Ben – NAPCRG proposal on variability in
PIP
b.
April 7, 2016: Amanda or Nancy Gell on grant proposal
(also OK on 14)
c.
April 14, 2016: no Ben
d.
April 21, 2016: no Connie, Kairn
e.
April 28, 2016: Amanda?
Marianne?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.