- [Voice Over] The Dementia

Researcher podcast,

talking careers, research,

conference highlights,

and so much more.

- Hello and welcome to special podcast,

recording highlights of the

UK Dementia Research Institute

Annual Connectome Conference.

(upbeat music)

Hello, I'm Dr. Anna Mallach,

and I'm from the UK Dementia Research

Institute Centre at Imperial.

And I look into the role of support cells

and how they can contribute to Parkinson's

and the progression of this disease.

So those of you who don't know,

Connectome is the UK

DRI's annual conference,

which means that at the end of every year

or towards the end of every year,

over 600 UK DRI members

from across the institutes

are coming together every

year in a different city

across the UK to talk science and meet up.

It provides a very important

opportunity to connect

with colleagues from other

centres, other locations.

And today we're giving you some insights

into what was presented

over those three days

that happened last week.

Before we jump into the

highlights, let's meet our guests.

Tom?

- Hi, yes, so my name's Tom.

I'm a researcher from Imperial College

with the CR&T Centre,

the Care Research and Technology Centre.

And I'm with Paul Fremont's lab,

and I, so I have a

background in engineering

and the rest of the team are

all synthetic biologists,

and we are developing a device

which detects for urinary tract infections

for people living with dementia.

It's a home testing device

that we're trying to provide to those

so that we can mitigate the need

for symptom recognition

and enable home testing

for quick detection.

- Interesting.

Beth?

- So, hi, I am Beth.

I am a postdoc at the

University of Edinburgh,

and I really just recently

joined my supervisor,

Susanne van Veluw moved

from Boston to Edinburgh.

And we're part of the new

British Heart Foundation

Cardiovascular Dementia Research Centre.

I think that's right, I'll check.

And I'm working on a disease

called cerebral amyloid angiopathy,

which is where amyloid

protein gets deposited

around blood vessels within the brain.

So I do lots of cool research into that.

- Finally, Dayne.

- Hi, I'm Dayne Beccano Kelly.

I am a group leader here at the

Dementia Research Institute.

Specifically the geographical location

of this one is at Cardiff University,

and I work on synaptic

dysfunction in Parkinson's

as a way of identifying early therapeutics

and how this may shift and

change over time to identify,

basically the most efficacious

therapeutic strategies

we could do at each phase of the disorder.

(upbeat music)

- Amazing, so now that

we've met the guests,

for those who haven't had one

of our conference podcasts

before, this is how it works.

So we will each take turns

discussing an interesting talk

or poster that they

attended at the conference

that really made an

impression in whatever way.

We'll loop around a couple of times,

you really get a sense of the broad things

that happened at the conference.

So, Beth, let's begin with you.

What stood you...

What stood out for you at the conference?

- So there's a couple of things.

So, 'cause it was my first Connectome,

I was just really surprised

by the size of it.

I think I sort of didn't

realise like the scale

of the UK Dementia Research Institute,

and, you know, the vast amount of science

that everyone sort of studies.

I'm a blood vessel person

so it's really easy for me

to just stay in my blood vessel field.

So it was really nice

to sort of learn more

about the genetics and things

like that, that people study.

So that was just my first little thing.

But for me, the main things

that really stood out at this conference,

and I feel a bit bad for saying it first,

is the all the lived experience sessions.

I think it was really fantastic how,

like, the start of the

conference of the first day

we had the lived experience conversation

with I guest Rory Cellan-Jones,

who's one of the hosts of the

Movers and Shakers podcast.

And he talked about his own experiences

with Parkinson's disease.

And he actually was a gay gay,

he, like, asked questions

to some scientists on stage.

And from that he talks about,

you know, the importance

of communicating with people

living with Parkinson's disease

and communicating during

those clinical trials.

And especially the importance of using

sort of the correct language,

like making our complex

science make sense to people.

I think that's, you know,

something really important

that all researchers

have to sort of focus on

when talking about our work,

and sort of the focus on when

there would be treatments,

you know, keeping hope

but not overpromising.

I thought they were

just some really lovely

take home messages from

that sort of conversation.

And then, you know, still going on

about the lived experience sessions.

I really also enjoyed how

the conference sort of ended

with another fantastic

lived experience session,

and it was totally

different to the first one.

In this one Charles Sabine

sort of who represents

the Hidden No More Foundation presented

a really moving talk sort of,

he, like, narrated sort

of his own experiences

with Huntington's and this was sort of,

you saw videos from his career

and he talked about his family,

and, you know, the hope that was now here

with the gene therapy trial

that we've also talked about,

which I'm sure somebody will

talk about in this podcast,

but they were just particular for me.

- Yeah and I think particularly with this,

like, mirroring of having Sarah Tabrizi

give the science talk just

before about the therapies,

and then I think that

was timed incredibly.

And then having, yeah, Charles

talk right immediately after,

not as a scientist and coming at this

from a very personal and

such different angle.

I think that was incredible

'cause I think as scientists

we want to develop these cures,

and I think was often so siloed

in our little science boxes

that it was a beautiful reminder

as to what we're working for.

- I also thought that Rory Cellan-Jones'

section was fantastic.

He had come here to Cardiff previously

and we met with him individually

and he just so sharp

and was great at translating

the science into very good

and effective audio bites rather

than it just sounding cool,

they were actually accurate,

which sometimes may not happen

when we are translating data

to the media, the main screen.

So I also really liked that, Beth.

I thought it was really good.

- Yeah, I really liked his talk as well.

I think it's just always so

compelling seeing the people

that actually affected,

and, like, hearing,

yeah, getting to engage in them and have,

like, meaningful discussions.

And yeah, like you said,

just not being lost

in your day-to-day research and seeing

actually where we're going with our work.

- For sure, and I think kind of reflecting

on maybe previous Connectome conferences,

I thought this one was amazing

that it had this focus

on the lift experiences.

So, in a way that was kind

of one of the feedback

that I gave like this.

Maybe we should keep this up.

All right, Tom, what was

one of all your highlights?

- Yes, I mean Connectome's

always a bit of a funny one

for me because I'm from

an engineering background,

and obviously it's very

focused on neuroscience

and it can be quite challenging.

But in the same breath,

there's so much to learn on on that basis,

and it just highlights

how multidisciplinary

the whole thing is.

But I really liked, it was

one of the first talks,

it was Malcolm Macleod and

he's a professor of neurology

and translation of

neuroscience at Edinburgh.

And I mean for, yeah, anyone who saw it,

he is, like, super

entertaining, very funny.

And his focus was much more

on how researchers actually

conducts themselves

and how to really push for

sort of good quality research.

And while that sounds quite obvious,

it's just not really discussed that much

for early career researchers I've found.

And like a lot of the emphasis

is on pushing for papers

and getting into like good

journals and things like that.

And he actually spoke in one

of our centre meetings a few months ago.

Yeah, just again, the same thing,

a really thought-provoking,

really makes you think about the quality

of your own research

very, very introspective.

Yeah, just talking about

how personal biases

of researchers can really

steer your research

and how to sort of avoid

those from creeping in.

So, yeah, I always quite like his talk

so it made me feel very reflective.

- That was during the early career

and technology stay, wasn't it?

So that's the day...

For people who don't know

that's the day we have before Connectome.

So this case on Monday

for the early career

researchers and technologists,

which again I think is

wonderful opportunity

to kind of bring, yeah,

everyone together in a group,

maybe without the scary group leaders.

- Yeah, I agree with Tom.

I think the Malcolm's talk was fantastic,

like, super engaging.

I think I heard so many people

talking about afterwards,

and like you say, it's

just something that,

you know, is definitely

needs to be talked about,

but it's quite hard to talk about,

and it's hard to talk about

in a really engaging manner

that people don't feel,

you know, he just explained

it in such a great way,

and it wasn't just like you say

about going in these top tier papers,

it was about being, you

know, having integrity

and doing the best research you can.

And I think to hear it

back from someone so high

up and so esteemed is,

you know, really helpful for,

you know, early career researcher.

- You both just mentioned

it there as well,

which is that there were quite

a few neurologists in there

or practising neurologists

that also doing research,

and that from my team and others

that I've spoken to about,

it seems to have come

across that it was that one

of the best things about

this particular Connectome

was that there seemed to

be a really a good breadth

from basic science, as we term

it, all the way through to,

again you just said the

patient engagement as well

or the people with dementia engagement

and then neurologists. And

it just felt like there was

a really good balance this year.

So you can see how it can move

from one phase to the other.

And that's been said a number of times

at least here at the UK DRI,

but you guys have just

mentioned it as well.

So I think that's been

particularly good as well,

and I'm glad it was, that

they were so engaging

and that you guys found

it engaging as well as,

you know, myself and everybody else.

It was really good.

It was really good.

- Amazing, so now that

you're already talking

about what you really enjoyed, Dayne,

what was one of your personal highlights?

- I thought all the plenary

speakers were really good.

So it is not to say that they,

like, anyone in particular

was better than the others

'cause I actually, from

personal perspective,

really liked Erin Schuman's talk

'cause it worked on synapses.

I'm not sure can we classify Sarah's

as being a plenary talk?

It wasn't specifically gay,

but she just rushed back

from her BNA award ceremony.

And so, I feel like it had quite a lot

of billing leading up to that

and that was also really good.

But I thought Christian

Haass talk was fantastic.

I thought it was really good.

It was quite refreshing

because he himself,

I think by his own admission was like,

I'm coming towards the

end of my career now,

and he just kind of came

out and was just like,

I don't think Michael Greger,

the initiator of Alzheimer's disease.

And he caught it, sort of

caught, like, almost a short,

sharp intake of breath from

some people in the audience.

And I was a bit like, okay,

this is gonna be a good one

because I've seen him give talks before

and he's always really good.

But, yeah, I thought it was

quite nice to maybe start off

with what could be perceived

as a controversial statement perhaps

to something in the crowd,

but then, you know, back it up with all

of the evidence that he's had over time.

And he gave a lot of, not

only was the work really good

and talking about the fine

balance that's required

between, like, microglial

control within the brain

and whether or not it's

attacking aggregation

of amyloid beta or whether

or not it's maintaining

the balance of whether

it's causing detriment,

or keeping everything in

check was there as well.

But he also gave really

insightful snippets

as to how to manage the career,

and I don't know if anybody

else sort of picked up

that he was talking about

interactions with pharma

and industry and the best

connections he's ever had

and maybe huge pitfalls

that he'd interacted with

and the things that to

do and perhaps not to do.

And he interspaced it really

well with the idea that,

you know, microglia may

not be the initiator,

but may well be a driver

and modulator of the disease process

and affecting penetrance and

affecting the manifestation.

And so, I just thought it was a,

just a sort of a really

wonderfully well balanced talk

in giving both insight into Korea

as well as insight into the disease state.

And so, I just thought it was a,

I fanboyed a little bit and was just like,

man, I hope I can be that cool

when I'm getting to the end

of my career because it was really good.

And I was like, yeah, so I was like,

yeah, it was, I thought it was fantastic

and just really, really well delivered

and the science in it was so well executed

as you would expect from

Christian Haass as well.

- Yeah, but in a way I

had the similar feeling

'cause I feel like I've worked on TREM2,

I was quite familiar with the science,

and so what I found really interesting

was how he approached his career.

And not just like science for

the sake of doing science,

but also thinking about it strategically

and kind of his shift

towards the microglia.

He was like, you know, 10 years left

and then we decided to

look at the microglia,

and you're like, this is,

it's the art of doing science,

- Yes.

- as well as doing science.

- Yes, doing it well,

and having a sort of a

clear understanding of like,

he did it so methodically as well.

And it sort of like, it seems...

Possibly it seems like that

the way he presented it and in hindsight,

but from my impression of his

work throughout his career,

it does seem like he

built the fundamentals up

and then found something

and then expounded upon that

and then found that and it just,

it was just so well built.

And so, yeah, I'm not

gonna start fanboy again,

but it was really good.

I thought it was great.

So that's one of my highlights

and it's not to say that

sort of Erin and Sarah's work

wasn't beautifully well presented as well.

It just struck me personally

from my personal point of view

that it was just such a

beautiful balance in the talk.

So it was good.

I thought that was really great.

- I think it was also super accessible.

Like, I know a little bit about TREM2

but I am definitely not an expert in TREM2

and I think the way, you know,

his graphics on the slides,

the way, you know, he

built up that information.

I think it probably allowed people

who didn't really know much

about microglia and TREM2

to actually access some

of that information

'cause, you know, it can be quite hard

when you're at these conferences

and if it's not your

sort of research realm,

you know, we're all quite niche.

I think when it's presented that way,

it is just, like, more

achievable for everyone

to kind of like understand

the concepts of it.

- Yeah, you're absolutely right.

And I think in similar vein,

one of my conference highlights

was actually Erin Schuman's

keynote on on the synapses

'cause I'm not a synapse person.

I kind of started to dabble in it.

But she just started out her talk

with this, like, beautiful rotating image

of just, like, a neuro and

all of the projections.

And it was so, even as a neuroscientist,

just seeing that visual and she,

you know, went very deep into

the structure and whatnot.

So my team have been like,

fangirling, boying over that

for a really long time now.

And they all, I have to try and force them

not to do any structural EM now

because they were like,

yeah, it's structure.

And I was like, oh, God, no.

There are many steps we have to take

before we can get as cool

as Erin, please, people.

- No, yeah, yeah.

It's gonna take several

years of dedicated work.

I know that, yeah.

- Yeah.

- My PhD student wanted

to go and talk to this.

Erin, if you're watching this,

we'd love to collaborate with you.

I don't know if that was

just a shameless shout out.

My PhD student tried to

find you directly after this

and we couldn't find you, so.

But yeah, the work was great, I agree.

It was really great.

- Yeah.

And again, like, really accessible

'cause by the end, like, all of the,

like, really nitty gritty

of the findings and the,

you know, the ribosomal

changes at synapses,

I think that could have

immediately gone over my head.

And yet, kind of she slowly built it up

that by the time she got

to that point, you're like,

well, of course that makes sense.

(all laughing)

- Yeah, I'm excited.

- Yeah, excited.

Well, this doesn't feel

like a breach anymore

to kind of say, of course they,

you know, within 10 minutes

neurons or ribosomes,

synapse become so stressed

that they shut down.

And by the end, you were like,

yes, that's, now I can go read the papers

and maybe understand slightly more.

- Yeah.

- But what I also really...

Then she kind of also highlighted,

you know, the website

that they had on like,

the synaptic RNA versus the cellular RNA.

And I think that just,

as a kind of notch to, like, data sharing

and making data available

and accessible in a way that,

you know, everyday

scientists are interested

who don't necessarily have a background

in bio can access it.

I thought that was just

one of the many things

that I really enjoyed about her talk.

- Very good, really good.

(upbeat music)

- Right, so we've done the

first round of highlights,

I think we're gonna go around again.

So, back to you, Beth.

- Oh, yeah, so I think the,

there's obviously just so many

really cool, exciting talks,

but I have to sort of highlight the,

we had a whole session on introducing

the British Heart Foundation,

UK Dementia Research Institute Centre

for Vascular Dementia

Research, that's the correct.

You know, when you move somewhere new

and you have to learn

all these new acronyms.

And I loved that session because,

you know, it's a new sort of centre,

it's not a specific place.

The idea is it's, you know,

it's the whole institute as well.

We've not done it in geographics.

So there's people from Oxford,

there's people from Edinburgh.

Where else?

- UCL, right?

UCL, there we go.

So it's really nice, and

this was a great talk,

like, great session.

We learned about oligodendrocytes, CAA.

We learned about brain energy supply

and blood-brain barrier

models in vitro models.

And I think it was a

really nice way to sort

of introduce the centre to everyone,

and, you know, give an idea of the work

that some of these scientists do

And then, you know, hope for,

you know, collaborations from people

'cause a couple of these

scientists are new to the field.

So my supervisor, Susanne van

Veluw, she's moved to the DRI.

We have new TA who's a Oxford,

Rakesh Jain who's at Edinburgh.

And then we have Catherine

Hall who's at UCL

and also at the University of Sussex.

So I think it's just a really nice,

and this is headed by

Dave Attwell who's at UCL,

and I think it was just a

really lovely introduction to,

you know, something that

I'm really passionate about,

which is blood vessels.

I love blood vessels.

- I love it, I love it.

I love it, really good.

- Yeah, one of my highlights as well

was specifically Catherine Hall's talk.

I thought it was just very interesting,

yeah, talking about the oxygen supply

and how that affects the

brain and and memory.

And I think for, yeah, from my background,

she managed to explain it very well

and I was able to follow

through a lot of it.

But, yeah, just interesting how like,

sort of subtle reductions in oxygen.

And yeah, and therefore

energy to the brain

just have a real impact on memory

and how this can show up

very early for the disease

and more obvious symptoms.

But I thought that I found

that quite interesting.

It clicked for me that it

links with some of the work

that's actually done in

our own centre by Derk-Jan.

He focuses a lot on sleep.

I don't know if you guys

saw his talk as well,

but he's spoken before about sleep apnea

and how that obviously has big reductions

in oxygen while sleeping.

And yeah, obviously affects

the energy supplies of the brain.

But just interesting thinking

about those two separate

sort of indicators that they both can,

yeah, just lead to memory

problems specifically.

- Definitely, and I think this is why,

for example, the new Centre

for Vascular Research

is such a good addition to the GRI

'cause I think we have

a lot of GRI researchers

who kind of dabble on the edges

of kind of vascular dementia research.

And so it's really nice to kind of say

we have this concrete centre now

with our four dedicated group leaders,

but we also obviously have

a lot of other group leaders

in the DRI who are doing

a bit of research on that

and kind of just giving

them the biggest space now

to collaborate and do something.

So I thought definitely, with

our asset here at Imperial,

there was a lot of discussion afterwards

of, like, collaborations,

maybe even with Susanne specifically,

and doing a range of

those different things.

I think it's a nice addition to the DRI

and I think we'll add a lot more

than just four group leaders,

and David Attwell, I

guess five group leaders.

- Yeah, I agree.

There are already so many people

who do blood vessel research,

you know, endothelial cell research,

astrocytes sort of research

who have done amazing

work on that already.

And I think you're so right.

Just the addition of the centre is just,

I think it's just nice

for everyone who is,

you know, interested in blood vessels,

and like you say, people who

are sort of on the cusp of it.

I think it's really nice to,

you know, there's so much,

we need so much more

research in that area.

So it's really nice that there is this,

you know, the funding for this new centre.

- All right, so I guess,

Tom, you just talked

about your highlights,

so we're back to you, Dayne.

Another highlight.

- So I think, it's

gonna sound a bit weird,

the breaks were really good.

(indistinct)

But specifically, specifically,

and I say this in jest,

but also I'm serious

because we just, again,

briefly touched on it.

It's really nice to sit down

and have conversations with your peers,

with, you know, next

generation of scientists,

and actually come up with some new ideas

and really spit balling based on X talk.

You've just seen that stimulated ideas,

and has led you to maybe

continue the conversation

as you're coming out of the auditorium

and then sitting down and sort of really,

you know, shooting it

out and really starting

to come to a conclusion that,

you know, you possibly could

work on something together.

I had a really good chat

with a few people from this,

including Marco Brancaccio

and hopefully we're gonna do

some new innovative work together.

And it's all come from

just sort of sitting down

and working through some of the ideas

and really trying to hash it out.

Could we actually do this?

What would we need first?

Is there preliminary data we can gather?

Does this, you know, meet our needs?

Yes, no, maybe.

Can we really work this through?

And so, yeah, I've really

valued that ability

to have the period of time

where you can sit down

and really sort of chew

the fat around the science.

Especially when you did have,

you know, talks like Christian's

who was being a bit

controversial about something,

or had said a controversial statement.

And so, it sort of drove the conversation,

the discussion that you could have,

and sort of really generated

that ability to have,

you know, a really raw chats about data,

which can be really sort of stimulating.

And so, I do sincerely mean it,

although it does sound

funny that the breaks

were really useful in between all of those

to really sit down.

I think there was the ability to do that.

There was that room way at the back

that had tables that people suddenly found

when we were trying to

eat dinners and lunch

that it was kind of that

we found ourselves in there

and chatting way a few times.

And so that was really, really powerful.

I'd say another thing, sorry,

just that was really good,

was the, I know it's general,

but in the area where we had

the poster sessions was the table,

and for instance, the

dementia researcher section

was really good for me to volunteer,

voluntold some of my

students and postdocs to go

and chat about their

science and get it out there

because I think that the fact

that we do have so many outlets

for showcasing the work

via different platforms,

YouTube, shorts, audios,

podcasts, et cetera,

it's really powerful for getting our data,

but also exposure of the

ECRs datas, data sets.

And I think that's really

important personally,

and I pushed forward Gloria

Cimaglia, my postdoc,

and Shikha Kataria and Susanne

to put their either

audio or minute shorts,

and those are already up online on like,

LinkedIn and YouTube and

talking about their data

and sort of metabolism Parkinson's

and also looking at lysosomal dysfunction

and be able to showcase it

in sort of different styles.

Shorts, audio, where you

are answering questions

kind of gives access to what we're doing

'cause I'm really a big proponent of,

sort of demystifying

the science that we do

because I don't think it serves

anything to keep it sort of,

oh, you can't know about this,

we're just doing science things.

You don't need to look behind

the curtain sort of idea.

It's much better to just be out there

with all the information

for various reasons,

but not least of which,

'cause we're doing this for,

you know, the populace,

and so they should know what we're doing.

So I think having all that data out there

in these different

mediums is really useful.

And so it was really nice

to have that opportunity

in those spaces as well.

So I really love that.

- That's good, and I think

talking about the ECRs

or slightly more ECRs,

one of my highlights

now we've talked about,

you know, the big keynotes

was actually the parallel sessions.

So I thought it was so nice

that for a couple of moments

at the conference we could break up

into two smaller groups,

which also meant that

for at least the session

that I was hosting

on data and digital,

which means we moved

into the room upstairs.

So it wasn't the big scary auditorium,

which it was a smaller contained group

and they listened to maybe,

yeah, more the ECRs talk.

And I thought that was

really powerful as well

to kind of hear from the

people leading the research

and doing the research,

what they were doing.

So one highlight for me was Magda Kolanko,

who is from David Sharp's lab

at the care tech research,

Care Research and Tech.

- Yeah.

- CR&T.

- CR&T, yeah, we've already defined it

so you can use the acronym now.

- Centre at Imperial who used,

who's kind of working on

something very different

to what we are doing, but

using early detection systems,

in this case, a sleep mat,

to be able to predict

respiratory infections

in people living with

dementia, living at home.

And to really enable with that,

feeding this to the NHS

and enabling people to stay

in the home for longer.

And I thought that was just a really nice,

just such different approach, but giving,

just such different approach,

but, like, using data for common good.

And we had a lot of

discussion about it afterwards

in terms of data analysis and training,

you know, something that

sounds very scary, AI systems,

but, like, how can that best be done

and what uses do they have

and how do we actually do science?

So I thought her talk was a

really good jumping off point

to maybe have other discussions as well.

So, yeah, that was one of my kind of very,

yeah, one of my highlights, for sure.

And if you do parallel sessions,

you can showcase double

all the amount of talent

in a way mathematically.

So, yeah, I think we'll do one last whip

around about highlights.

So, Beth, final comments.

- More comments.

So I was genuinely very impressed

by all of the flash talks.

I think sometimes you

can go to a conference

and they say flash talks,

and they said it was one

minute and I thought,

how can anyone describe what

they've been doing in one?

Because that one minute is really short.

- Oh, yeah.

- Like, I've been to them

where three minutes and I'm

like, okay, three minutes,

you know, it's a good amount of time.

But one minute, and I thought,

how are they gonna do this?

And every single person

explained their work

in such a succinct manner.

It was clear, it was

concise, they were engaging.

There were a couple of like, little like,

ooh, come and see my post

if you wanna actually

know what we're doing.

But, like, I just think they,

all of the researchers did

such a good job of that.

And I think it's the best flash talks

I've ever seen at conference.

I was really, really impressed.

And then it made me, like, want to go

to some of the posters.

I saw somebody who was

reaching Gaia Brezzo

from University of Edinburgh

in the same institute as me,

but you don't always know

what people are doing.

And I really loved the project

that they were working on,

so I then went and spoke to them about it,

some of the models that

they've been using.

And I found that was a really

good sort of starting point

to chat with people about their work.

So the flash talks were

done fantastically.

- Yeah, they were really good.

Did you see the one done by abs that was,

he took a bit of a different approach

where he asked the questions to the crowd.

- Yeah.

- And I think, different,

I think he just like worked

that format very well rather

than sort of squeezing,

squeezing the PhD or

whatever into 60 seconds.

It was just perfect.

(indistinct)

- The mindset, it was really good.

- It was really good.

- So for people

who didn't see it,

do you wanna just

briefly say what Abs did,

and maybe where he's from?

- So Abs, this is slightly

biassed, he's also from CR&T

but, yeah, he basically asked a question

of how many people in the

room think that EEG could be,

could cause accelerated ageing.

And people put their hands up

and then he asked about different factors

and gradually the hands went down,

but some people still thought

that they might affect it.

And then he was like,

"Well, you guys don't need

to come to my poster, but

everyone else come along."

And it was just, yeah, it

was just perfect I thought.

But also, yeah, a really

impressive bit of work from him

and looking at how these EEG signals

can predict accelerated ageing.

And yeah, just super,

like, 15-year-long data set,

is, yeah, it's just very,

very compelling data,

and, yeah, a bit different.

- Yeah, it did stick in the mind.

It was such an interesting approach to it.

It was brilliant, yeah.

- And very efficient, part

of it takes, like, very much,

like very different than

any other flash talk,

but hit it on the nose,

and all within 60 seconds.

I was the timekeeper for

that flash talk session.

And I have to say I was really worried

they would run over boards.

We were very strict with them.

Not a single one.

A lot of them I think, 'cause

I scared them a bit too much,

stuck to 30 seconds.

I was like, no, so like

you can talk a bit more.

- Yeah, yeah, you really

embedded a lot of fear,

I think, in the-

- Oh, god, we don't need

to have this on the air, sshhh.

Okay, Dayne, one of your highlights.

- Okay, sorry, I'll try

and swiftly lead it on.

I apologise, guys, that's funny.

One of the other talks,

so, again, I thought this

sort of parallel sessions,

this sort of were brilliant,

but one of those from one

of the parallel sessions

was one of the first parallel sessions,

the exchange auditorium.

It was specifically Amanda Heslegrave.

She was talking about the

Biomarker Factory, yeah.

And she's just, her style

in delivery is brilliant

and she just seemed relaxed

and knowledgeable at the same time,

which was a brilliant mix for the platform

that she's trying to push forward.

The Biomarker Factory platform,

which, you know, we have access to,

which allows us to

interrogate different systems

with different bio fluids and et cetera

that we can look for different markers in.

But because she's so sort of

knowledgeable and laid back,

you feel like it's an

approachable thing for you.

She showcased the work, she

showcased the abilities,

she also highlighted some

of the current caveats

that were there, but delivered it

with what we can talk about

how we would build this up

and how this might work

for your particular samples

and how we might push forward with that

and the current strengths

maybe with the gaps

in their particular

data sets are currently.

So I just think overall, whilst,

again, showcasing the

capabilities and like I said,

the caveats, I feel like a lot of people

might have been inspired

by what is possible

and also have felt the

ability to be able to go,

right, well, I can just go up to her,

chat to her about what

we can do moving forwards

and that's can only be good for a platform

that's basic to be utilised by all

of the different teams across the DRI.

So I just think it's really good,

and I'm a big fan of the sort of work

that she and Henrik Zetterberg are doing

at the Biomarker Factory.

So I think the delivery

of that was spot on.

So it was really good.

- Oh, that's good because I think,

yeah, it's one of those weird things

when you have platforms and researchers

and you somehow want the platforms

to be very accessible and yet,

so I think it's a definitely tough sale.

She was trying to do that.

I had another highlight from

actually the same session.

That's something that

my team that came back

and we just did a kind

of highlight session

in the lab meeting yesterday,

and they all really enjoyed

Ganna's talk from UCL.

So she's leading the,

or she's co-leading the,

or she's involved with

the human tissue hub

that the DRI is now setting up

in combination with Holland,

Colin, who's up at Edinburgh,

and Susanne's down at UCL.

And I think she gave a

really interesting talk

coming kind of from the

pathologist background of,

these are the different aggregates,

and she showcased the digital

pathology they're doing

and the most recent

preprint of kind of scanning

in a lot of archival brain

tissue and analysing that.

And I thought that was

something that inspired,

yeah, my ECRs and the team a lot,

and we've been kind of having long

and hard discussions about

how we do neuropathology

and how best to approach it.

So that was great to kind of,

yeah, inspire students.

- Good, inspirational, I love it.

- Inspirational, yes, exactly.

Which is I guess ultimately

the entire point of Connectome.

(upbeat music)

So before we close,

let's zoom out a little.

What do you think were the

hot areas of discovery?

What was the big takeaway?

And in your own research areas

to maybe bring it down a bit more,

what do you see as the next big challenge?

Where are we moving towards?

- Can I start?

- Anyone wanna go?

Yes, go for it.

- I'll keep it brief and

then we can hear from them.

I'll just give you time.

I'll just, I think, like I said before,

I and a lot of other

people that I spoke to

really liked the sort of breadth

of going from basic science to,

you know, drug discovery

even or testing of drugs

to hearing from individuals with dementia.

And so I think one of the things,

the big things that came over to me

was the idea of translation,

translational science,

and even to a degree,

although may be to a degree,

is applied science.

So the idea of trying to get our work

out from bench to bedside.

So trying to see what we can do

with the research that we're doing.

And it just came over well

as to us to not have any,

not have any one stage of

that have too much emphasis.

So you can see how basic

science can be translated

to identifying the best targets

and the best way to then

stratify those targets

and the best way to identify

the best therapeutics

for those targets and then execute it.

And perhaps we need,

we obviously need more

of that execution part,

but for me, the way that it was styled,

it was a doable visible thing.

And I suppose the block

to that at the moment

or one of the blocks to

that at the moment in,

for instance Parkinson's

research is the idea

of when you would test those things.

So we currently have the ability

to identify individuals to,

you know, a fairly good positive degree

once they have the actual

manifestation of the disorder.

But quite often perhaps we're

working on model systems

that predate that, the

upper precursors for that.

And so translation of our drug

is perhaps not working when

we do take it to clinic

because it's at a different

stage of the disorder.

And so I think getting biomarkers

and ways of identifying,

again, let's take Parkinson's earlier,

is gonna only help us to translate

because perhaps we can work

towards using different

identified therapeutics

and tools at different phases,

really trying to stratify it

into different stuck

parts of the disorder.

But yeah, for me, translation

is one of the things

that really we're strongly coming across

and that's the next thing is to work out

how we get much more of the

work that we're all doing

to clinic to actually

help the individuals.

- Good point.

Beth?

- Yeah.

- Yeah, no, I, like,

second that completely.

One of the things that I really

took from the conference,

and I think probably

because the last session,

you know, sort of ended talking

about a clinical trial was,

you know, the, how do we

get to a clinical trial,

and, you know, how would that work?

What's the best way to

have the clinical trials

and how do we get the most out of them?

And obviously, you know, Sarah

Tabrizi's talk talking about,

you know, going from

discovery and all of that,

you know, basic science work

to the actual gene therapy clinical trial.

And that sort of leads onto

in my sort of area of research

in cerebral amyloid angiopathy.

There's actually the first

clinical trial happening

for CAA called the Capricorn trial

and it's for both individuals

with Dutch-type CAA,

which is like a familial

version, so genetic.

And then, also sporadic CAA.

I mean it's like an RNA therapeutic

to reduce the production

of the protein that, you know,

produces amyloid protein within the brain,

and then, which obviously

goes to the vessels.

So this is super exciting

'cause in this study that,

you know, they'll be using,

there'll be extracting CSF ,

and looking at, you know,

species of amyloid within there.

And I think it's, you know,

it's a really exciting time

for the CAA field specifically.

And I think it, you know, really hits

on these hot areas of discovery,

and, you know, how you can go from,

you know, sort of basic research up to,

you know, clinical trials.

- Sure.

Tom, what do you see

as the next big challenge or opportunity?

- Well, I guess for me,

I think the emphasis around

lived experience participants

coming to the Connectome,

I think, yeah, it's

the inclusion of people

with lived experience in designing.

Particularly in my work where

I'm trying to design a home,

a home testing device and

actually really considering

the co-design process and

how to make people's thoughts

feel validated and listen to

and really help that drive the sort of,

I guess the design and

development of my device.

But then, yeah, and see how that affects

the progress being made in these projects.

And then, yeah, I guess how

that then translates into,

yeah, commercialising these things

so that they do get to bedside.

Yeah, that was my big sort of takeaway

and the theme of the whole

conference, I really felt that,

- Yeah, no, I think I

agree and I think that was,

I guess ultimately the

intent of the conference

and I think it was executed

beautifully in that way.

So, yeah, even for the

fundamental researchers,

not basic fundamental researchers-

- That's a better word, thank you.

- Oh, you're welcome.

- I prefer that.

I prefer it.

- Just when you say like-

- Foundational.

- Foundational, yeah, because

I'm like, I do basic science.

It sounds just bit math.

- I always think it hits

the ear wrong as well, yeah.

- All right, well, I

think that wraps things up

for today's episode.

Huge thanks to everyone at the UK DRI

for putting together

such a brilliant event.

I think we've been definitely highlighted

some of the highlights.

And of course, thank

you to our great guests,

Beth, Dayne, and Tom for joining me today

and sharing such insightful reflections.

See you next time, but

for now, I'm Anna Mallach,

and thank you very much for listening.

(upbeat music)

- [Voice Over] The

Dementia Researcher Podcast

was brought to you by

University College London,

with generous funding from

the UK National Institute

for Health Research,

Alzheimer's Research UK,

Alzheimer's Society,

Alzheimer's Association,

and Race Against Dementia.

Please subscribe, leave us a review,

and register on our

website for full access

to all our great resources.

DementiaResearcher.nihr.ac.uk.