🚨 Bioverge Access Fund 4 is now accepting investors! Leverage Bioverge expertise and back 15 leading healthcare startups through a single investment. Learn more and invest

The Bioverge Podcast: Improving Epilepsy Outcomes with Digital Health Technology

Rachel Kuperman, CEO of Eysz, sits down with Neil to discuss her company’s efforts to develop a digital health platform using passive eye-movements as input to measure, diagnose, and predict neurological disease starting with epilepsy.

Xuexxcxvsb6grvsigykr
Xuexxcxvsb6grvsigykr

Rachel Kuperman, CEO of Eysz, sits down with Neil to discuss her company’s efforts to develop a digital health platform using passive eye-movements as input to measure, diagnose, and predict neurological disease starting with epilepsy.

Available on SoundCloud, here.

Available on iTunes, here.

undefined

Full Transcript


Danny Levine (Producer)
Now we've got Rachel Kooperman on the show today. Who's Rachel.


Neil Littman (Host)
Yeah. Rachel Kooperman is a neurologist. She is also the founder and CEO of a company by the name of Eysz. She has over 10 years of experience directing the clinical epilepsy pediatrics research program at UCF Benioff children's hospital in Oakland. She took some of, I think, what she learned about some of the gaps in treating epilepsy patients and has since left her position there to be an entrepreneur and to build Eysz, to try to come up with new treatment options for patients with epilepsy. I'm incredibly excited to talk to Rachel about her personal experience, leaving academic medicine and leaving her role as a clinician to become an entrepreneur and to develop some what sounds like really game changing technology in the epilepsy space.


Danny Levine (Producer)
What problem is I's trying to solve?


Neil Littman (Host)
Ice has developed a basically it's an essay AI based clinical software program that is able to track eye movements of patients with epilepsy. Today the existing treatment paradigm is that obviously large seizures are obvious, but there's a lot of patients that have much more subtle seizures known as seizures that are much more hard to detect largely go undetected. AISES has come up with a, an algorithm and a a software program that uses subtle eye movements to actually detect those types of seizures. The goal of all of this is to give clinicians more data to then be able to refine not only the specific medication that is given to patients, but also the dose of that medication. Because as we know all, all medications have side effects as well. I'm really excited to learn a little more about the technology Lauren, where it is in terms of development.


Neil Littman (Host)
Just a little background for, for listeners. Epilepsy in the us is huge. I think it's three, almost 3.5 million people are diagnosed with epilepsy annually. It affects one in 26 people. This is a major, a major disease. I think is' is doing something really potentially transformative here.


Danny Levine (Producer)
How challenging is it for a doctor to get the right drug and the right dose to a patient?


Neil Littman (Host)
That's exactly what we're going to talk to Rachel about. I mean, she has a wealth of experience in this space and my sense is that it's incredibly challenging. It's, it's largely done in a trial and error fashion today, but you know, I'm going to ask Rachel that question, but my sense is that is one of the major reasons why she left her position at UCS at Benioff to start Eysz is to try to solve this critical problem.


Danny Levine (Producer)
Well, if you're ready,


Neil Littman (Host)
I'm ready, Danny. Let's do it. Rachel, thank you so much for joining us. I'm incredibly excited to have you on the show today.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Great. Well, it's my pleasure to be here.


Neil Littman (Host)
Today. We are going to talk about epilepsy, the challenges managing condition AISES seizure detection platform, which is designed to improve outcomes. Before we dive into that, why don't we start with epilepsy itself? Many listeners probably have a notion of what epilepsy is, but what happens when a person with epilepsy has a seizure?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yeah, so epilepsy is actually just the definition and what it means is having recurring seizures without clear provocation. For example, if someone has diabetes and their sugar drops and they have a seizure that doesn't necessarily mean that they have epilepsy. In order to have epilepsy, you have to have near no clear cause for the seizure that can explain it at the time. In the typical diagnosis is having two or more unprovoked seizures. The interesting thing is that about 10% of people will have a seizure in their lifetime. So it's quite common. It's just that we don't talk about it a whole lot.


Neil Littman (Host)
Interesting. There a typical age that epilepsy is diagnosed?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
So there's two peaks. The first is early childhood and then the second is in the elderly and the frequency is actually as about one in 26 in the United States.


Neil Littman (Host)
Oh, wow. So actually pretty common. In terms of the condition itself, how heterogeneous is episode epilepsy? It, is it fairly predictable from patient to patient or is there a wide variance in terms of frequency, intensity of seizures, ability to treat and prevent seizures?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
So like many diseases of the brain epilepsy is almost a symptom of a disease. What that means is that it's epilepsy doesn't define the cause. It just means that you have recurrent seizures. Someone could have recurrent seizures because they have an underlying genetic syndrome. They could have recurrent seizures because they've suffered a head injury. They could have recurrent seizures because they had a stroke when they were elderly, for example. There's a whole host of different etiologies that can cause seizures. One of the things that the physician has to do when someone presents with seizures is figure out if there's a cause that they can identify that being said, even in, with the most advanced imaging systems and workups about 50% of the time, the physician can not identify a cause for epilepsy. It is a wide variety of different causes and then the different causes come with different natural history.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
That's one of the challenges is that as a physician, kind of as a group, how people do, but you don't know how the patient in front of you is going to do. For example, we know that the more frequent your seizures are when you present, the more likelihood that medicines aren't going to work very well for you. That's an association, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's, true for everybody sitting in front of you. There's a lot of different factors that have been identified through clinical research and you can get a rough picture of how somebody is going to do, but you don't know, a hundred percent, the new kind of field of genetic testing has really taken off. We can now have a better idea if we can identify a genetic cause what the natural history is going to be. Even then there's a wide variety of outcomes.


Neil Littman (Host)
And that's a really interesting point. Why don't we dive into that ? Does the underlying cause of epilepsy and of the seizures dictate how you, what you prescribe in terms of treatment options. Actually that's kind of dove tails into what our current treatment options as well.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yeah, so we know that certain genetic epilepsies respond better to certain medications. For example, there was a rare epilepsy syndrome that's caused by a sodium channel mutation called . There's a very specific profile of medications that people who have that disorder are more likely to respond to. I would say, that's not that common where we know exactly which medicines people are going to respond to, or aren't going to respond to in general, what physicians have is 26 medicines roughly, and then they can say, okay, well, this person's epilepsy is a generalized epilepsy. I'm going to narrow it down to these, five to 10 medicines that we know work best. In a few cases, we may know which medicine works best. Like for example, in absence, epilepsy, we know that FSX has the greatest likelihood of stopping the seizures with the least amount of side effects.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
It's one of the few places where we have class one evidence saying, try this drug first, but most epilepsies, we don't have that kind of evidence. The doctor goes on what their experience has been and what the literature tells them is most likely the best choice. It also depends on the patient. For example, if you have somebody that's a young woman, who's thinking about pregnancy, you want to avoid drugs that are known to cause problems with the developing fetus. That would be another way that a doctor would pick a medicine would be to avoid certain medicines that have known side effects that wouldn't be tolerated.


Neil Littman (Host)
Rachel is, then it sounds like, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like some of how treatments are prescribed is by trial and error at this stage of the game. What, what are, if that is indeed the case, what are the consequences of this to patients, for example, or to families or to the healthcare system in general?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
The important thing to remember is that the outcome of epilepsy treatment is to stop seizures. Doctors are unsure of the best medicine for a specific patient, then they have to trial through the medicine and then trial up the different doses. They have to wait for the family or the patient to provide feedback on how the medication is doing. You can imagine that if families are unsure, if there was a seizure or not. We know that even best case scenario, 50% of seizures are missed. That what that leaves clinicians and families with is a very hard time figuring out. My dosing, this medicine appropriately and pharmaceutical companies have that same problem because they have to show that medicines decreased seizure burden by at least 50% to be approved. The big problem boils down to, yes, the doctor is taking the best information that they have and using that information, but they're still guessing.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
They're waiting for this feedback from families, which may or may not be as accurate as one would like, so it can slow down the process and it can lead to this cycle of overdosing, meaning that the family, or to me, the patient is experiencing side effects because the dose of the medicine is too high, but they may be seizure-free and this can lead to poor quality of life, or they could be underdosing meaning that there's ongoing seizure activity because there's not enough medicine being given.


Neil Littman (Host)
Rachel, I know you experienced some of these challenges firsthand, and before we dive into the technology that IES is developed, I think it would be really helpful for our listeners to provide some of your background and how you came up with the IES technology that you're now working on, given your experience, treating a variety of different, patients with epilepsy.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yeah. So, I always think of this one family, this their daughter who was about five or six at the time of her diagnosis, she had a diagnosis of absence, epilepsy, and her seizures were very brief on the order of five to 10 seconds each. She would stop and have this kind of glazed over appearance and blink really quickly and then would return to normal. Her parents were both attorneys and we had a long conversation about the risk benefit of medications and starting her on medicines and ultimately started her on medications. Her parents came back to the first appointment and I said, okay, great. How are things going? They looked at me kind of perplexed. They're like, well, she's in school all day. The teachers don't recognize the seizures were held with her for a couple of hours before she goes to bed. We don't know what happens at night.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Maybe they're a little better, not sure. That, I think kind of hit it home. Like here you have a family that's trying to do the best by their child that has agreed to put them on a medicine with the goal of improving their quality of life and preventing injury from seizures. We don't have the information that we need to figure out if this treatment is working. That's when it just kind of hit home like, oh my goodness, am I going to make this kid come into the hospital so I can count her seizures so I can figure out if I need to go up on the medicines and there's no other specialty I can think of in medicine where you would have to bring somebody into the hospital just to figure out if they're doing better. That ultimately led for me to do more research in the space to figure out how we could improve our understanding of how our treatments are progressing and affecting the people that we care for.


Neil Littman (Host)
Rachel, I want to dive into that one nuance here, cause this is critical and I think your story highlights it perfectly, but I just want to be clear for our listeners. You have mentioned observance epilepsy, and I think for our listeners, could you just what that is and how that differs from the epilepsy? That a lot of us imagine where our seizures are very obvious and are, w w certainly much more visible than I think in the case that you had just described.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yeah. Most people think of seizures as these big events where people fall to the ground and shake. The reality is that's only a small percentage of the total seizures. It makes up less than 20%. The bulk of seizures are either non convulsive meaning that there's no shaking or minimally convulsive, meaning that there might be some movements, but not very prominent. The big problem is that when you have a child who has a very subtle seizure type, it can be modified also by treatment. So, whereas pretreatment, the child might have these obvious ten second events, which are grief. It can be missed, but at least there's a clear appearance to them, but then it's treatment progresses. The events could become less frequent and they could become even more settled. Maybe it harder for the family to identify it for the bulk of people, with epilepsy who have what are called non convulsive seizures.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
The seizures can consist of things like a strange appearance to their eyes, like they're glazed over and then picking movements or chewing movements and unresponsiveness. That can be really confusing for observers to figure out if someone is actually having a seizure or it's normal behavior, particularly if they're not experienced with seeing them before. For example, a teacher may not be able to identify an event as a seizure because they've just never seen it in, aren't looking for it.


Neil Littman (Host)
Okay. I think this is a great segue then into the technology that you're developing at ISE, which is really technology for passive or remote monitoring for patients with epilepsy. Could you describe about the goal of the technology, what you're trying to achieve through the technology and then th the different components nuts and bolts of the technology itself?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yes. The technology is really based upon the idea that I movements are a window into brain activity. Our brain is wired basically to focus for example, on what we're thinking about. There's a tremendous amount of neuroanatomy and neurophysiology dedicated to the eye movement circuitry. What that means is if we can measure the eye movements accurately, then we can understand better what's going on in the circuits of the brain. We know that seizures alter the circuitry of the brain by making a significant part of the brain really too excited, and other parts of the brain kind of quiet down. It's been known for many years that people who lose consciousness have this, keep their eyes open and have this funny glazed over appearance. We basically set out to take that clinical observation and turn it into a time series of numbers by using leveraging existing eye-tracking technology and developing algorithms to be able to identify those events.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
That's really the concept behind the passive measurement of consciousness that we're starting with. We're starting with absence epilepsy, because there's really no tools out there to help kids who have this disorder. And it's really hard to measure. The kids who have it have a lot of events, which lets us gather a tremendous amount of data really quickly. That's really one end of understanding the seizure burden. The other important aspect is understanding the side effects and the way seizure medicines work is that they try to quiet the brain down to make it less excitable. When you quiet the brain down, what you're also doing is quieting all the normal activities, the brain down. That's why people who take seizure medicines don't necessarily feel great. They feel like, Hey, I'm not thinking as quickly as I was thinking before I feel drowsy. That's the direct side effect of the medications action on the brain.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Our goal is also not just to measure the seizures, but also to measure the side effects so that we can develop a dose response curve and help understand, oh, as a clinician, I put my patient on this dose of medicine and look, the seizures are getting better, but oh goodness, the side effects are clearly not going to be tolerable or vice versa. The seizures are getting better and the side effects aren't significant. Let's keep going. A bit a physician can then make appropriate decisions instead of sitting down with the family and having the family provide information that they just aren't equipped to provide.


Neil Littman (Host)
It sounds like the, the ultimate goal of that technology is through capturing a wealth of data that clinicians will be able to make more informed treatment decisions, both in terms of the type of medication and dosing of that medication to properly treat an individual patient's seizures is, am I understanding that correctly?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Exactly. The idea would be that we could get someone to the correct dose where they have the best possible seizure control with the minimum side effects as quickly as possible. For about one third of people who don't respond to medications to move them to other treatments that may be more invasive, but they'd be more likely to benefit from as opposed to medications. So really to speed up the process. On average, it takes 18 years for a patient with medicine, medication, refractory epilepsy. They don't respond to medicines to get to a more definitive treatment like surgery. Our goal really is to cut that by at least half.


Neil Littman (Host)
Wow. Yeah. I mean, 18 years, that's a tremendously long time. It sounds like there is a dire need for this type of technology. Can you tell our listeners about where you are in the stage of development what's been done to validate the technology to date?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yeah. There is extensive literature to date about kind of a subjective description of what happens for people. We, when I was at UCF, we did a proof of concept study where were able to show that compared to EEG, we could use humans to detect seizures and use that to file for our patent. Since I left USCSF, we have met with the FDA about our clinical study protocol and have move forward with the multi-center trial. We're running our study at four sites, UCLA children's hospital, orange county, UC San Diego, Rady children's and wake forest. It's also listed on clinical trials.gov. If you're interested in learning more about it's called the Daisy clinical study. The purpose of the study really is to enroll a lot of children and adults who have absence epilepsy, and to compare their eye movements to EEG, which is considered the gold standard.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
To take that information, to refine the algorithm before we proceed on with the validation study, hopefully early next year, where we will confirm the sensitivity and specificity of our algorithm as we move towards FDA clearance.


Neil Littman (Host)
I think that brings up a good point. Could you talk about the FDA approval or regulatory pathway for this type of device?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yeah, so the FDA was very wise, I would say, and they basically set up a whole category for non EEG based physiologic, seizure detectors. There are two FDA approved devices in that category are ready and they both are developed to detect the shaky movements of convulsive seizures. That is the category that our device falls under. It's considered software as a medical device. We are not building the eye-tracking hardware as there's many companies out there that have a significant expertise in eye tracking, and we will be utilizing their technology with our algorithms living in the cloud and using their inputs. We basically produce a report that is regulated by the FDA.


Neil Littman (Host)
Got it. Just in terms of obviously, clinical trials are not exactly predictable, but if everything were to go generally, according to plan, when would this device be available generally for patients and for clinicians to be able to use the device for their patients?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
The goal is to have the device on the market by Q1 2023, if everything continues according to plan without any new worldwide pandemics.


Neil Littman (Host)
Yeah. It's some of these things are obviously very unpredictable and health of your control. Rachel, I did want to circle back to a comment that you made, and I think we have a lot of both clinicians and entrepreneurs who listened to the show. I want to dive into I guess, your personal experience. I mean, you ran clinical epilepsy research program at UCF Benioff children's hospital. For many years, you decided to sort of take the leap and become an entrepreneur and start Eysz to develop this technology. Could you talk about your thought process and experience going from, from being a practicing neurologist to making the transition to being essentially a full-time entrepreneur to, to build out the company and the technology?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yeah, so it's a very humbling experience I would say. So, I ran the paeds epilepsy programming Oakland, and I was 10 years in and, 10 years into doing something, you get quite good at it. Not that there's nothing to improve, but you're very comfortable in your role as an expert. So that's really great. There are many challenges in caring for people with epilepsy and medicine has its own challenges, but ultimately I actually decided I was ready for a new adventure. That was part of what led me to start the company was this was my desire for personal growth and continue learning. The second component was that I really felt like I wanted to change the lives of more people than I could do one-on-one as a clinician. It really felt like in order to disseminate something completely novel, it wasn't enough to publish it in the literature, but you really had to ultimately turn it into a product that somebody could use.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
That kind of, that basically led me to take the jump. It is a very lonely thing to leave academic clinical medicine and go do something totally different. I think that if I look back on my career, there was always a, when I was in medical school, I'll take a step back. When I was in medical school, there was this belief that industry and clinicians shouldn't interact because for example, pharmaceutical companies who take clinicians out to dinner influence either consciously or subconsciously the clinicians behavior and that clinicians need to be unbiased in their choices and to stay away from industry. I was developing my career, I really stayed fairly far away from industry because of that, medical upbringing, so to speak. To take the leap and say, okay, I'm going to go to industry to build my own industry. Was there was a mental barrier there on top of just the, Hey, I don't really know what I'm doing in this yet barrier as well.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
So, what I have to say is that the bay area is an amazing place to start a business. There's tons of mentorship, the national science foundation and the national institutes of health are really geared towards helping clinicians, scientists step out and build something. I've really been able to take advantage of that mentorship to learn a tremendous amount. Also through my co-founders, I mean, my co-founder parse background in medical devices has really taught me a tremendous amount in my other co-founders Git background in computation has reminded me of my days as a physics undergraduate student to, really remember and think about integrating these into the product.


Neil Littman (Host)
I mean, it's, I, in many ways what you're describing is, what we often find is, it takes a village to help a company grow and mature and scale, and, leaving, a steady job that you had been at for 10 years to take a leap of faith, to start a company, to develop something that you really believe in. I think, is definitely takes a lot of courage. So I certainly applaud your efforts there. W w w one thing that comes to mind is, as you're building, as you're scaling the company, right, you're developing new skill sets that you didn't have an academia. A lot of that is around the commercialization of technology. One of the things that I spend a lot of time thinking about is of course, the, academic medicine, academic research has a critical role in developing therapies and in treating patients, right. Non-profit organizations, disease foundations have a critical role in funding, early stage research, but nothing is really going to get to the patient without the commercial sector.


Neil Littman (Host)
Right. I, as far as I know, there's never been a drug, for example, that has reached patients that has not been developed and marketed by a pharma or biotech company. So there is a critical role that industry plays, as you thought about, you know, building Eysz, you know, I know you're currently now undergoing a regulation crowdfunding offering with believers will, we're proud to be partners there. Can you talk about how you thought about financing, the company, building the company, the types of investors that you're looking for. Also, as you thought about launching the regulation crowdfunding offering, could you talk about what was attractive to that compared to perhaps some of the more traditional venture or angel avenues that you've thought about, and perhaps you're pursuing both in parallel, but we'd love to understand about your thought process there.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Yeah, so, I think we basically divided the fundraising into non-dilutive funding, such as the national institutes of health and other grant opportunities versus diluted funding. We've been lucky enough to have an SBR phase one and have a from the national institutes for neurological disorders and have been able to fund our clinical studies partially based on that funding with hope for future applications and more funding as our product continues to develop in terms of the diluted funding. We really focused on developing partnerships with companies who have a strong interest in this space. For example, our biggest investor is UCB pharma. They're also one of the largest epilepsy drug developers in the space, and it's a great source of validation for us, but it's also wonderful to talk with partners like that about developing future products together as well. We've also been fortunate to have investors from angel groups, such as health tech, capital, and CG, and Joel's as well as plug and play, which has provided a wealth of introductions and visibility.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
So that was one component of it. The second is really that we want to engage with people who have epilepsy as we're. We want to take this journey together. The goal of crowdfunding really is to bring in the voices of the people who are going to benefit or ultimately use this product. That's what we're excited about when it comes to the crowdfunding aspect is really bringing the community along on the journey and hearing their input.


Neil Littman (Host)
I think that's a critical point, right? That is a huge differentiator for crowdfunding versus more traditional avenues of financing is you can actually engage your community. You can engage with patients, you can engage with your constituents, who already care about the disease that you're working on fighting and developing technology for us. I I'm incredibly excited for the campaign and the offering. Rachel, if folks want to learn more about ISE or if they want to get in contact with you learn more about the crowdfunding campaign, how can folks learn more about what you're doing?


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
You can certainly visit our website it's E Y S Z L a b.com. Another great way is to follow us on LinkedIn. We post our steps as we move forward and really like engaging with people there as well. The bio verge portal is another great place to learn about the offering and it directly invest.


Neil Littman (Host)
Rachel, thank you so much for joining us today. I've really appreciate your time and for a really interesting and thorough discussion. Thanks so much.


Rachel Kuperman (Guest)
Thank you.


Danny Levine (Producer)
So what'd you think now,


Neil Littman (Host)
I thought that was a, a really incredible discussion with Rachel. I, I think one of the key takeaways for me is that, ISE is developing a solution that by using patients eye movements, doctors can potentially get the data. They need to make more informed treatment decisions, both in terms of, medication type and dosage of medication, which, it sounds like it could have a profound impact on patient's lives. It sounds like there's a critical need from that, or a critical need for that, excuse me, in the epilepsy community these days,


Danny Levine (Producer)
It's astounding to me to think it can take 18 years to get medication, right. Patients in the absence of this type of data, getting treatments, right. It, is it just a matter of trial and error?


Neil Littman (Host)
That's what it sounds like. I mean, according to Rachel on you heard our discussion, it does seem like a lot of, prescribe, the prescriptions and dosing for patients is trial and error. Let's let's try medication and see what it does. Let's try dose, see what it does and have patients come back and report the outcomes. But the issue that IES is trying to solve is it's relatively easy to detect large Caesars, or as you heard Rachel, talk about, you know, the large Caesars are what we all think about when we think about episode epilepsy, someone falling on the floor, convulsing Eysz, rolling back. In fact, a large percentage of seizures are not that way at all and are very subtle and very minor. It's, it sounds like it's critical to get those correct in order to fine tune the dosing. That's, what's really going to have a major effect on patients and, and outcomes.


Danny Levine (Producer)
What do you see as the biggest challenge for the company?


Neil Littman (Host)
I, obviously the company is still early stage, so you, we heard Rachel talk about some of the early validation they have, they need to perform larger validation studies to validate the technology before gone to the FDA for approval of, so obviously there's always a lot of clinical risk. I think Rachel has done a really nice job in terms of you de-risking the technology as much as possible, but again, they're still early stage. All startup companies in some sense, it does take a village to ensure that technology has brought the market. So, one of the things that I asked Rachel on, I think she did a really nice job of explaining is how she thought about financing the company, right. So early on. I think this is a great model, in fact, for others to follow and, and, one that we often look for when we're making investments at bio works is, has the company receive non-dilutive grant funding, and that can come from a variety of different sources.


Neil Littman (Host)
It could be the NIH, it could be the NSF, it could be disease foundations, right? There's a whole host of options out there for non-diluted funding. That's a great way to finance in a non-dilutive fashion, early stage research. Of course, moving to, whether it's individual angel investors or angel groups, one of the things that ISE was successful, which is really nice to see is, strategic funding from strategic partners. That's a huge point of validation for the technology and for the company you heard Rachel talk about the, the regulation crowdfunding offering and the benefits of going out to engage the community and allow the community to invest in offering. This is a relatively novel path for healthcare for biotech companies to follow. And, now that you can raise up to $5 million under a reg CF offering, I think is going to become more commonplace. Exactly.


Neil Littman (Host)
For the reason that Rachel described is engaging the community. I think that's going to be critical to helping build these types of companies going forward. So, there's whole host of challenges from the, the scientific side in terms of validation, but then of course, from the business side of things and findings in the technology, but it sounds like Rachel has done a really nice job with all these things. I, for one will be really excited to see how this technology is continued to be developed and some of the clinical results that they're going to get here over the next 12, 18 months.


Danny Levine (Producer)
What do you think this technology says more broadly about the potential for digital health to be used to improve patient outcomes?


Neil Littman (Host)
Yeah, I think it's, I think that this is a, a great example of how technology can be implemented to try to solve fundamental problems in health care. If you think about what is' is building, it, it really is a technology solution. The technology solution is being applied to in this case, help more accurately diagnose and treat patients with epilepsy, but it is essentially a software package and algorithm that they've developed. I think this is a great example of how bringing in a suite of technology can help clinicians make more informed decisions when it comes to treating patients clearly how this can benefit patients. I think this is, a great, digital health or digital therapeutic application of, of software. I think we're going to start seeing more of these types of applications in the future. This is one that I'm particularly excited about.


Danny Levine (Producer)
Well until next time.


Neil Littman (Host)
Thank you, Danny. Looking forward to it.


Danny Levine (Producer)
Thanks for listening. The bio verge podcast is a product of bio Virginia Bessman platform buttons, visionary entrepreneurs with the aim of transforming health bio Berg provides access and enables everyone to invest in highly vetted healthcare startups on the cutting edge of innovation from family offices, registered investment advisors, and non-accredited individuals to learn more, go to bio verge.com and this podcast is produced for bioburden. The use it for this podcast is provided the Curtis with Jonah Levine collective.