Category: 8. Health

A new study by scientists at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus reveals that joint tissue from patients with early-stage rheumatoid arthritis often have high levels of a protein called granzyme used by the immune system to attack pathogens.

(more…)

Around 1 in 6 older adults take aspirin as their primary method of preventing cardiovascular disease – despite stricter guidelines that no longer always call for it, a study finds. 

Almost one-quarter of those aspirin users started taking the medication without a physician recommendation and 8% had not discussed their use with any health care provider. 

The results, published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, come from a survey of more than 2,500 adults aged 50 to 80 conducted for the University of Michigan’s National Poll on Healthy Aging. The new paper builds on a previous poll report, with additional analysis. 

“For some patients without a history of cardiovascular disease, the benefits of taking aspirin for primary prevention may be offset by an increased risk of bleeding, especially as patients get older,” said Jordan K. Schaefer, M.D., senior author and clinical associate professor of internal medicine-hematology at University of Michigan Medical School. 

“It is even more concerning when patients are taking aspirin without consulting their physician. A provider can’t help a patient understand the risks and benefits of aspirin if they are left in the dark.” 

In the past decade, guidelines for who should take aspirin for cardiovascular reasons have been revised to reduce the situations in which it’s recommended. The changes were informed by newer research that highlighted significant bleeding risk associated with using the medication for primary prevention – that is, by people with no history of heart attack or other heart disease. 

The American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association advise against routine primary prevention aspirin use after age 70. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force also recommends not starting aspirin for primary prevention after 60 and potentially stopping around age 75. 

While the vast majority of primary prevention users in the study believed that aspirin reduces their risk of heart attack, just 68% agreed that it increases the risk of bleeding. 

Just over 80% of respondents said aspirin helped with general health, and 29% believed it reduced the risk of dementia. 

It appears that older adults taking aspirin may anticipate benefits beyond reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease and may not fully understand the added risk of bleeding.” 

Mark D. Edwards, M.D., first author and internal medicine resident at U-M Health

The younger survey participants, between the ages of 50 and 69, were more than twice as likely to take aspirin for primary prevention compared to those aged 70 to 80 years. 

Women and those with a household income $60,000 or greater were also more likely to be primary prevention users. 

“Aspirin use is much more of a complex question than it once seemed, which is all the more reason why it is important to consult a heath care provider when considering use,” said Geoffrey Barnes, M.D., M.Sc., co-author and associate professor of internal medicine-cardiology at U-M Medical School. 

“I would recommend that anyone over 40 years old talk to their provider about their risk for cardiovascular disease, with careful consideration of family and health histories.” 

Study findings suggest a positive association between estrogen plus progestin hormone replacement therapy (EP-HRT) and increased risk of breast cancer in young adult women. The data, published in Lancet Oncology, may provide deeper insight into the potential risks of specific HRT types in pre- and postmenopausal women to better guide clinical decision-making.¹

“Hormone therapy can greatly improve the quality of life for women experiencing severe menopausal symptoms or those who have had surgeries that affect their hormone levels,” Katie O’Brien, PhD, lead author of National Institutes of Health (NIH)’s National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), said in an official NIH release. “Our study provides greater understanding of the risks associated with different types of hormone therapy, which we hope will help patients and their doctors develop more informed treatment plans.”²

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is often used to ease the symptoms of menopause, such as hot flashes, vaginal dryness, and mood swings, that arise as estrogen levels naturally decline with age. It may also be recommended for individuals who have undergone a hysterectomy or oophorectomy. There are 2 main types of HRT: estrogen-only therapy (E-HRT), typically reserved for those who no longer have a uterus, and combined estrogen-progestin therapy (EP-HRT), which is used when the uterus is intact to help reduce the risk of endometrial cancer.^2,3

Studies confirm that estrogen plus progestin is a risk factor for breast cancer in postmenopausal women, but there are little data on the impact of these therapies in young women who may need HRT following gynecological surgery or for perimenopausal symptom relief. In a pooled cohort analysis, an international team of researchers at the NIH investigated the relationship between exogenous hormone therapy and the risk of young-onset breast cancer, drawing on data from 10 to 13 prospective cohort studies conducted across North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. This large-scale analysis followed women up to age 55, focusing on the impact of hormone therapy (HT; used interchangeably with HRT) on breast cancer incidence in younger populations—a group for whom data has historically been limited.^1,2

A total of 459,476 women between the ages of 16 and 54 years (mean age 42.0 years) were included in the study. Over a median follow-up of 7.8 years, 2% of participants (n = 8455) were diagnosed with breast cancer before age 55. HT use was reported by 15% of participants, with the most common regimens being estrogen plus progestin therapy (6%) and unopposed estrogen (5%).¹

The researchers found no overall association between HT of any type and young-onset breast cancer (HR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.88–1.04). However, use of estrogen-only therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk (HR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75–0.98), corresponding to a 0.5% absolute risk reduction by age 55.¹

In contrast, combined estrogen plus progestin therapy was associated with a modestly elevated risk of young-onset breast cancer (HR 1.10; 95% CI, 0.98–1.24), particularly with longer duration of use (>2 years; HR 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01–1.38). The association was strongest among women with intact uteri and ovaries (HR 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02–1.31).¹

The team also reported results from a subtype-specific analysis, which revealed that estrogen plus progestin therapy was more strongly associated with estrogen receptor–negative (HR 1.44; 95% CI, 1.11–1.88) and triple-negative breast cancer (HR 1.50; 95% CI, 1.02–2.20), suggesting potential biological differences in hormone sensitivity.¹

These findings offer new insight into the differential impact of hormone therapy formulations on breast cancer risk in younger women. The results align with existing data on hormone therapy and later-onset breast cancer while highlighting the importance of individualized risk assessment when considering hormone use before age 55.

“These findings underscore the need for personalized medical advice when considering hormone therapy,” said Dale Sandler, PhD, NIEHS scientist and senior author, in an official NIH release. “Women and their health care providers should weigh the benefits of symptom relief against the potential risks associated with hormone therapy, especially EP-HT. For women with an intact uterus and ovaries, the increased risk of breast cancer with EP-HT should prompt careful deliberation.”²

REFERENCES

1. O’Brien K, House M, Goldberg M, et al. Hormone therapy use and young-onset breast cancer: a pooled analysis of prospective cohorts included in the Premenopausal Breast Cancer Collaborative Group. The Lancet Oncol. June 30, 2025. Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(25)00211-6

2. Breast cancer risk in younger women may be influenced by hormone therapy. NIH. June 30, 2025. Accessed July 2, 2025. http://nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/breast-cancer-risk-younger-women-may-be-influenced-hormone-therapy

3. Hormone therapy for menopause. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. February 2024. Accessed July 2, 2025. https://www.acog.org/womens-health/faqs/hormone-therapy-for-menopause

The strength of certain neural connections can predict how well someone can learn math, and mild electrically stimulating these networks can boost learning, according to a study published on July 1^st in the open-access journal PLOS Biology by Roi Cohen Kadosh from University of Surrey, United Kingdom, and colleagues.

When it comes to cognitive skills like reading and math, early advantages tend to compound over time. Mathematical abilities, however, seem to plateau from childhood to adulthood, raising the possibility that innate brain characteristics might shape academic outcomes independently of external factors like socioeconomic status. To better understand the neurobiology of mathematical learning, the authors measured connection strength between brain regions associated with learning math while 72 participants performed a 5-day math task. While solving math problems that required either calculating a solution or rote memorization, participants received weak electrical stimulation to either the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), which plays an important role in executive function and calculations; the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), which is associated with memory recall; or a placebo. They also used magnetic resonance spectroscopy to measure two brain chemicals, glutamate and GABA, that hint at the brain’s current capacity for learning and change.

The researchers found that stronger baseline connectivity between dlPFC, PPC, and the hippocampus – a region involved in long-term memory and in this context, generalizing algorithms across problems – predicted better math performance when participants were asked to calculate the solution, but not when they memorized it. People with weaker connections between the dlPFC and PPC regions improved at calculation learning after electrically stimulating dlPFC. The authors suggest that these results hint at the viability of using brain stimulation to aid math learning in people struggling with biological disadvantages. The authors also identified a complex relationship between neurochemistry, brain plasticity, and communication between regions associated with executive function and memory. Future studies should more deeply examine these relationships, and test whether a neurostimulation approach like this could help people outside of the lab.

Professor Roi Cohen Kadosh, the lead author of the study and Head of the School of Psychology at the University of Surrey, said, “So far, most efforts to improve education have focused on changing the environment – training teachers, redesigning curricula – while largely overlooking the learner’s neurobiology. Yet, a growing body of research has shown that biological factors often explain educational outcomes in mathematics more powerfully than environmental ones. By integrating insights from psychology, neuroscience and education to develop innovative techniques that address these neurobiological constraints, we can help more people reach their potential, broaden access to diverse career pathways and reduce long-term inequalities in income, health and wellbeing.“

For nearly 15 years, Donald Edmondson, PhD, executive director of the Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York City, has worked to shed light on the fact that up to one third of individuals who experience major, life-changing cardiac events go on to develop a posttraumatic stress disorder called cardiac PTSD. 

Edmondson has been the lead investigator on or participated on research teams behind more than 50 clinical studies showing everything from which patients are most likely to develop this unique form of medical trauma to how cardiologists can predict which of their patients may be most likely to experience its burdens. 

James Jackson, PsyD, who is the director of behavioral health at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, and helped start the ICU Recovery Center at Vanderbilt in 2013, was among the first clinicians to address cardiac PTSD in a focused manner. He said their team realized that there were specific efforts to help survivors of cancer, for example, but no programs to help other populations, including survivors of the cardiovascular ICU. 

“We tailor our care and try to individualize it, but there is always a strong psychological component, with a particular focus on mental health and neuropsychological challenges,” said Jackson, who has worked with Edmondson on several studies. “Addressing these as early as we can is crucial because in the absence of early intervention, these problems threaten to morph into challenges that are even harder to handle.” 

All this work has reached the point where the clinicians and researchers are ready to begin developing the interventions that may one day help patients exit the cycle of cardiac PTSD or avoid it altogether. Tens of millions of people affected by cardiac PTSD each year may be able to treat their potentially deadly cardiovascular disease without being traumatized by it at the same time.

Hands-On Interventions Could Start As Simply As 1, 2, 3, 4 

Research showed that it would be possible to potentially start these interventions with something as simple as a 4-point screening system for cardiologists to add to their patient follow-ups, Edmondson said. 

“The first thing they should be looking for is if the cardiac event really scared the patient. Perhaps they [say they were] terrified about it,” Edmondson said, in talking about what such an assessment might look like. “Secondly, patients who talk about their cardiac sensations, their chest sensations, are more at risk. They talk a lot about their symptoms and perhaps are asking ‘Hey, I’ve been feeling this. What does that mean?’”

A third indicator is if they talk about sleep problems. And if they say they’re not being physically active, “those are the types of things that together can give you a pretty good indication as to being at higher risk,” Edmondson said.

Edmondson said that upon assessing risk in a patient, the cardiologist would probably refer that patient over to a behavioral health professional for further treatment. At that point, he said that exposure therapy was just one of several types of therapies that would be researched for efficacy, depending on the patient’s most serious symptoms. 

“The existing model for depression care in cardiology is a good place to start in terms of researching collaborative treatment for cardiac PTSD,” Edmondson said. “We were getting some good preliminary data on this that we could significantly reduce secondary cardiac risk and mortality risk and improve health behaviors by bringing behavioral medicine [and] behavioral health into the cardiology clinic for recent cardiac event survivors.”

Another thing Edmondson pointed out is that many of the patients who later go on to develop cardiac PTSD are extremely frightened from the moment they interact with the medical process, either with emergency medical technicians or in the emergency department. A 2019 study published by Jeena Moss, MD, an emergency medicine physician at Mount Sinai Hospital in Queens, New York, established that clinician compassion and generally making the medical experience less stressful helped to interrupt the cycle of the disease — but that’s extremely difficult to standardize.

A 2018 study Edmondson published with an extensive team showed preliminary evidence of a placebo-like effect of percutaneous intervention (PCI) and stent placement. 

“We think this is because many patients who receive PCI incorrectly believe they are ‘cured,’” Edmondson said. “This is the ‘plumbing’ model of ACS, where they believe a blockage is opened up and all is good now.” 

Is there a way to use that information to help those who suffer from cardiac PTSD — not by erroneously installing a stent, but by redirecting the power of the human mind?

How Tech Can Help

Significant technology-based interventions are also in the early stages of development. Jeffrey L. Birk, PhD, MS, an assistant professor in the Department of Medicine at Columbia University in New York City, developed a study that would investigate modifying patients’ fear of their cardiac event recurring, fear that in the case of cardiac PTSD came in the form of intrusive thoughts. Birk said he focused on the internal nature of the triggers that caused these threatening reminders, such as increases in heart rate and perceived arrhythmias, which he noted could also be triggered by engaging in healthy physical activity.

“We want to be able to assess for whom and how often this maladaptive avoidance of physical activity is actually occurring during recovery after patients go home from the hospital,” Birk said. 

While he noted that systems already exist to prompt patients to self-report on the frequency of intrusive thoughts, these devices can’t assess for context, and that’s where he wants to go next. 

“One important future direction of this research is to develop ways of investigating these processes dynamically over time as they unfold in real time during patients’ lives,” he said. “We need to understand how and when interoceptive attention is problematic for patients’ mental and physical well-being.” 

Sachin Agarwal, MD, MPH, an assistant professor of neurology at Columbia University and a critical care neurologist at NewYork-Presbyterian, believes technology can help continue the path forward.

“We’re beginning to explore how AI-powered survivorship models can deliver personalized support, improve follow-up engagement, and extend the reach of family-centered interventions beyond the hospital walls,” Agarwal said. “Whether through intelligent triage, conversational agents, or digital peer support networks, these tools have the potential to translate our original vision into something both sustainable and system-wide.”

Over the past three weeks, Great Britain is the only country in the region to have recorded new cases of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in domestic birds.

Confirmed on June 11 was the first of four outbreaks in this population, based on official notifications to the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). At each location, presence of the H5N1 HPAI virus serotype was detected.

First to be affected in mid-June was a commercial flock of mixed poultry — comprising chickens, geese, and ducks — in County Durham in northeast England.

A few days later, presence of the virus was confirmed in around 76,000 laying hens in North Yorkshire. Suspicions of infection were raised when mortality spiked, and the birds showed typical respiratory and neurological symptoms.

Soon afterwards, pheasants and partridges tested positive for the same virus variant at Wrexham in north Wales. Of the total flock of 21,000, around 600 of the game birds died, and the rest have been destroyed to prevent further spread of the infection.

Most recently, a hobby flock of 120 laying hens was confirmed with HPAI after 15 of the birds died. These backyard hens were located near to the coast of southwest Wales in Pembrokeshire.

No new cases have been reported in the country’s poultry over the past week.

These latest outbreaks bring Great Britain’s total for the year to date to 49.

Additionally, more than 40 new HPAI cases in wild birds across the country have been registered with WOAH since mid-June. All of these tested positive for the H5N1 virus serotype. 

Overview of the HPAI situation in European birds

To date this year, 17 states in this region have recorded a combined a total of 250 HPAI outbreaks involving commercial poultry.

This is according to the Animal Disease Information System (as of June 25), and the figures are unchanged from the update two weeks previously. Administered by the European Commission (EC), the System monitors listed animal diseases in European Union member states and selected adjacent countries. These include Türkiye (Turkey), but exclude Great Britain.

For comparison, 451 HPAI outbreaks in this population were confirmed by 20 countries during the whole of 2024.

Outbreaks involved captive birds — including hobby or backyard flocks and zoos — are recorded separately in the EC’s System.

Also with no new outbreaks confirmed in the previously 14 days, the situation remains that 71 outbreaks have been registered by 16 countries in the region.

Among wild birds, the EC System records a total of 565 outbreaks in 30 countries to date in 2025 (as of June 25).

This represents an increase of 13 over the previous 14 days. New cases — up to five — were logged over this period in each of Belgium, Denmark, Finland, the Republic of Ireland, the Netherlands and Norway.  

Two cases detected in Norway involved the H5N5 virus. All the other had tested positive for the H5N1 variant. 

Quarterly review notes more infections in European mammals

In a review of the HPAI situation in the region for the last quarter, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) highlights an increase in the number of influenza A infections in mammals compared with previous years.

Over the three months to June 6, red foxes, otters, seals, and a domestic cat were found to be infected with the A(H5N1) or A(H5N5) viruses. For the first time, an influenza A(H5N1) infection was detected in a sheep.

Twenty-four countries in Europe recorded a total of 167 detections of influenza A(H5) in domestic birds, and 198 in their wild populations. In the same period, poultry farms in Hungary and Poland were hit by many outbreaks, particularly in ducks and chickens. This was attributed mainly to secondary spreading of the virus in areas of high poultry population density.

EFSA notes a decline in bird infections when comparing the study period with the previous quarter. However, the authors note that the epidemic peak in both domestic and wild bird cases in 2024-2025 reversed a declining trend in the previous two seasons. 

Evolving viral genetics, human risk 

In terms of virus genetics, the EFSA report found that EA-2024-DI has been the virus genotype most frequently detected in European birds since October of 2024. New genotypes found resulted from a reassortment between EA2025-DI and low-pathogenic viruses of Eurasian origin. Meanwhile, EA-2022-BB continues to circulate in some seabird populations.

Influenza A(H5) viruses with changes indicating adaptations to infect mammals have been isolated at several European locations, according to EFSA. The authors note that these adaptations do not appear to diminish the ability of the virus to infect birds.

EFSA reports that while human infections had been recorded elsewhere in the world, Europe registered none over the study period.

As a result, its assessment of the risk of human influenza A(H5) clade 2.3.4.4b to the general population in the region remains low. Also unchanged, EFSA assesses the risk as low-moderate for those in contact with infected animals or contaminated environments.

View our continuing coverage of the global avian influenza situation in poultry, and on disease developments in the U.S. dairy sector.

A new AI model is much better than doctors at identifying patients likely to experience cardiac arrest.

The linchpin is the system’s ability to analyze long-underused heart imaging, alongside a full spectrum of medical records, to reveal previously hidden information about a patient’s heart health.

The federally-funded work, led by Johns Hopkins University researchers, could save many lives and also spare many people unnecessary medical interventions, including the implantation of unneeded defibrillators.

“Currently we have patients dying in the prime of their life because they aren’t protected and others who are putting up with defibrillators for the rest of their lives with no benefit,” said senior author Natalia Trayanova, a researcher focused on using artificial intelligence in cardiology. “We have the ability to predict with very high accuracy whether a patient is at very high risk for sudden cardiac death or not.”

The findings are published today in Nature Cardiovascular Research.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is one of the most common inherited heart diseases, affecting one in every 200 to 500 individuals worldwide, and is a leading cause of sudden cardiac death in young people and athletes.

Many patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy will live normal lives, but a percentage are at significant increased risk for sudden cardiac death. It’s been nearly impossible for doctors to determine who those patients are.

Current clinical guidelines used by doctors across the United States and Europe to identify the patients most at risk for fatal heart attacks have about a 50% chance of identifying the right patients, “not much better than throwing dice,” Trayanova says.

The team’s model significantly outperformed clinical guidelines across all demographics.

Multimodal AI for ventricular Arrhythmia Risk Stratification (MAARS), predicts individual patients’ risk for sudden cardiac death by analyzing a variety of medical data and records, and, for the first time, exploring all the information contained in the contrast-enhanced MRI images of the patient’s heart.

People with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy develop fibrosis, or scarring, across their heart and it’s the scarring that elevates their risk of sudden cardiac death. While doctors haven’t been able to make sense of the raw MRI images, the AI model zeroed right in on the critical scarring patterns.

People have not used deep learning on those images. We are able to extract this hidden information in the images that is not usually accounted for.”

Natalia Trayanova, senior author

The team tested the model against real patients treated with the traditional clinical guidelines at Johns Hopkins Hospital and Sanger Heart & Vascular Institute in North Carolina.

Compared to the clinical guidelines that were accurate about half the time, the AI model was 89% accurate across all patients and, critically, 93% accurate for people 40 to 60 years old, the population among hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients most at-risk for sudden cardiac death.

The AI model also can describe why patients are high risk so that doctors can tailor a medical plan to fit their specific needs.

“Our study demonstrates that the AI model significantly enhances our ability to predict those at highest risk compared to our current algorithms and thus has the power to transform clinical care,” says co-author Jonathan Crispin, a Johns Hopkins cardiologist.

In 2022, Trayanova’s team created a different multi-modal AI model that offered personalized survival assessment for patients with infarcts, predicting if and when someone would die of cardiac arrest.

The team plans to further test the new model on more patients and expand the new algorithm to use with other types of heart diseases, including cardiac sarcoidosis and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy.

Authors include Changxin Lai, Minglang Yin, Eugene G. Kholmovski, Dan M. Popescu, Edem Binka, Stefan L. Zimmerman, Allison G. Hays, all of Johns Hopkins; Dai-Yin Lu and M. Roselle Abraham of the Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Center of Excellence at University of California San Francisco; and Erica Scherer and Dermot M. Phelan of Atrium Health.

DALLAS – July 02, 2025 – Adding targeted radiation to chemotherapy prior to surgery may offer better control of pancreatic tumors – potentially reducing the rate of recurrence after treatment, according to a new study from UT Southwestern Medical Center. Published in Clinical Cancer Research, the novel study offers evidence of a more effective approach with biological insights for treating one of the most aggressive and lethal forms of cancer.

“Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is extremely difficult to treat because even after chemotherapy and surgery, tumors often grow back, many times at the original site,” said study leader Todd Aguilera, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Radiation Oncology and a member of the Experimental Therapeutics Research Program at the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center at UT Southwestern. “Our findings suggest stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SAbR), which delivers high-dose radiation with minimal toxicity, may improve clinical outcomes for patients with PDAC by lowering the risk of recurrence – especially in cancers that invade or encase major arteries.”

The retrospective study compared 181 patients who were treated for pancreatic cancer at UT Southwestern and Parkland Health between 2012 and 2023 using neoadjuvant chemotherapy – designed to shrink the tumor prior to surgery – and either received or didn’t receive SAbR. Using RNA sequencing, the researchers examined molecular changes in tumor tissue among 43 of those patients to understand the biological effects of SAbR. 

Despite having more advanced disease at the outset, patients treated with SAbR had better treatment response and notably improved local control, or prevention of recurrence at the original site – particularly when arterial involvement was present — but similar overall survival rates. “This matters because local tumor regrowth causes significant suffering for patients,” Dr. Aguilera said. “As systemic therapies continue to improve, the burden of local recurrence becomes even more prominent – and more important to address.” 

The researchers, including first author and M.D./Ph.D. student researcher Peter Q. Leung, also found evidence that SAbR stimulated the immune system, increasing cancer-fighting lymphocytes in SAbR-treated tumors.

“While further study is needed, it’s possible that there is potential in combining high-dose ablative radiation with immunotherapies,” Dr. Aguilera said. “That could open up new areas to enhance antitumor immunity and ultimately improve cure rates for pancreatic patients, which today stand only at around 30% for those who undergo surgery.”

The research builds upon previous studies conducted in the Aguilera Lab, which focus on understanding how radiation changes the tumor microenvironment. 

“With high-resolution tools like single-cell RNA sequencing and multiplexed immunofluorescence, we are now investigating how each patient’s tumor responds at the cellular and molecular level and using that insight to develop smarter, more targeted treatments,” Dr. Aguilera said. “Detailed tissue analyses like those conducted here at UT Southwestern are critical for uncovering new therapeutic directions. This kind of work is only possible at a center like ours, where an interdisciplinary team collaborates closely to tailor the right treatment path for each patient. It also depends on the incredible commitment of our patients, who empower us to learn from every case. And none of it happens without dedicated trainees like Mr. Leung and the rest of our team, who take on critical parts of the effort.”

Dr. Aguilera is a Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) Scholar in Cancer Research, a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Moonshot Scholar, and a Damon Runyon Clinical Investigator.  

Other UTSW researchers who contributed to the study are Herbert J. Zeh III, M.D., Chair and Professor of Surgery; Adam C. Yopp, M.D., Professor of Surgery and Chief of the Division of Surgical Oncology; John C. Mansour, M.D., Professor of Surgery; Song Zhang, Ph.D., Professor in the Peter O’Donnell Jr. School of Public Health; Cheryl M. Lewis, Ph.D., Associate Professor in the Simmons Cancer Center and of Pathology; Patricio M. Polanco, M.D., Associate Professor of Surgery, Director of Robotic Surgery Training, co-Director of the Pancreatic Cancer Program, and co-Director of the Pancreatic Cancer Prevention Clinic; Nina N. Sanford, M.D., Associate Professor of Radiation Oncology and Chief of Gastrointestinal Radiation Oncology Service; Syed Kazmi, M.D., Associate Professor of Internal Medicine in the Division of Hematology and Oncology; Matthew R. Porembka, M.D., Associate Professor of Surgery; Megan Wachsmann, M.D., Assistant Professor of Pathology; Zhikai Chi, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Pathology; Salwan Al Mutar, M.D., Assistant Professor of Internal Medicine in the Division of Hematology and Oncology; David Hsieh, M.D., Assistant Professor of Internal Medicine in the Division of Hematology and Oncology; Eslam A. Elghonaimy, Ph.D., Instructor of Radiation Oncology; Muhammad S. Beg, M.D., Adjunct Associate Professor of Internal Medicine in the Division of Hematology and Oncology; Ahmed M. Elamir, M.D., Clinical Fellow in Radiation Oncology; Neha Barrows, B.S., Research Assistant II in Radiation Oncology; Hollis Notgrass, M.S., Lead Pathologist Assistant; Ethan Johnson, Clinical Research Coordinator; Cassandra Hamilton, B.S., Senior Regulatory Analyst; and Samy Castillo-Flores, M.D., and Ricardo E. Nunez Rocha, M.D., postdoctoral researchers.

Drs. Zeh, Yopp, Mansour, Zhang, Lewis, Polanco, Sanford, Kazmi, Porembka, Wachsmann, Chi, Al Mutar, and Hsieh are all members of Simmons Cancer Center.   

The study was funded by a Simmons Cancer Center Translational Cancer Research Pilot Grant; CPRIT (RR170051); the Carroll Shelby Foundation; the UT Southwestern Disease Oriented Scholars Program; and an NCI Cancer Center Support Grant (P30CA142543).

About UT Southwestern Medical Center 

UT Southwestern, one of the nation’s premier academic medical centers, integrates pioneering biomedical research with exceptional clinical care and education. The institution’s faculty members have received six Nobel Prizes and include 25 members of the National Academy of Sciences, 23 members of the National Academy of Medicine, and 14 Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators. The full-time faculty of more than 3,200 is responsible for groundbreaking medical advances and is committed to translating science-driven research quickly to new clinical treatments. UT Southwestern physicians provide care in more than 80 specialties to more than 140,000 hospitalized patients, more than 360,000 emergency room cases, and oversee nearly 5.1 million outpatient visits a year.

About Parkland Health

Parkland Health is one of the largest public hospital systems in the country. Premier services at the state-of-the-art Parkland Memorial Hospital include the Level I Rees-Jones Trauma Center, the only burn center in North Texas verified by the American Burn Association for adult and pediatric patients, and a Level III Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. The system also includes two on-campus outpatient clinics – the Ron J. Anderson, MD Clinic and the Moody Outpatient Center, as well as more than 30 community-based clinics and numerous outreach and education programs. By cultivating its diversity, inclusion, and health equity efforts, Parkland enriches the health and wellness of the communities it serves. For more information, visit parklandhealth.org.