Nominations Open for the End Brain Cancer Initiative's 2025 National Patient Disease Education Initiative and HOPE Award
Each May, for over a decade, the End Brain Cancer Initiative (EBCI) has presented the National HOPE Award to a brain cancer patient who deeply inspires us.
REDMOND, WA, UNITED STATES, March 18, 2025 / EINPresswire.com / -- Nominations Open for the End Brain Cancer Initiative 's 2025 National Patient Disease Education Initiative and HOPE Award
Redmond, WA (March 18, 2025) – Each May, for over a decade, the End Brain Cancer Initiative (EBCI) has presented the National HOPE Award to a brain cancer patient who deeply inspires us with their courage and story. EBCI established this patient disease education initiative and award to highlight exceptional people who have done exceptional things during their brain cancer journey, all while inspiring others.
The deadline for submitting HOPE Award nominations is April 16th, 2025. To submit a nomination, people can visit https://endbraincancer.org/hope-award-nomination/.
Patrick 'Paddy' O'Donnell is the 2024 National HOPE Award recipient. Paddy was a 20-year-old collegiate ice hockey goaltender at the University of Utah when he had a seizure. He woke up in the Neuro ICU connected to tubes and monitors wondering what happened. A biopsy revealed he had Glioblastoma (GBM) and three tumors. Paddy was nominated by his mother, Anne O'Donnell. 'Paddy had to create his own HOPE and sought answers and second opinions about his treatment,' she said. 'End Brain Cancer Initiative was vital in our search, at the most critical time, availing us of options and direct contact with experts in the field whom Dellann knew personally.'
The 2025 HOPE Award recipient will be announced during the End Brain Cancer Initiative's Know All Your Treatment Options (KAYTO25) online patient disease education event/webinar on May 16th, 2025. This free annual online event is designed specifically for members of the brain tumor, brain cancer, and metastasized brain tumor community to hear directly from top specialists, including researchers, in the field about advanced and FDA approved treatment options, clinical trials, devices, diagnostics, etc. that they may not have heard about and to 'DIRECTLY CONNECT' this patient population to many of these specialists. The event is free to attend due to corporate sponsorships, but pre-registration is required: endbraincancer.org/know-all-your-treatment-options-2025/.
About the End Brain Cancer Initiative
To support/donate to the End Brain Cancer Initiative's increased access and health delivery for patients, mission, services and programs, please visit EndBrainCancer.org
The End Brain Cancer Initiative (EBCI) is a 501(c)3 non-profit patient advocacy organization focused on disease education, awareness, outreach, increasing patient access and improving Standard of Care. The End Brain Cancer Initiative, formerly known as the Chris Elliott Fund (CEF), is dedicated to ensuring that all patients diagnosed with brain cancer, a brain tumor, or metastatic disease to the brain have equal access to advanced diagnostics, treatments, specialists, and clinical trial participation. We believe that IMMEDIATE ACCESS to these options provides this patient community with the best HOPE for survival and sustained quality of life. We partner with industry, patients, researchers, advocacy groups, medical teams, hospital networks and others to educate patients and their caregivers so they can have empowered conversations with their medical teams. Learn more about the End Brain Cancer Initiative at EndBrainCancer.org.
Dellann Elliott Mydland, End Brain Cancer Initiative, 425-785-8489, [email protected]
###
Dellann Elliott Mydland
End Brain Cancer Initiative
+1 425-444-2215
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
YouTube
Legal Disclaimer:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
2 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
New paper sheds light on experience of Black prisoners in infamous Stateville prison malaria experiments
Much has been said and written over the years about controversial malaria research conducted on inmates at Illinois' Stateville Penitentiary starting in the 1940s. But at least one part of that story has been largely ignored until now: the role of Black prisoners in that research, which helped lead to the modern practice of using genetic testing to understand how individual patients will react to certain medications, according to the authors of a newly published paper out of the University of Utah. 'We want to highlight the stories of Black prisoners that participated in this prison research in the 1950s onward and give them their due,' said Hannah Allen, a medical ethicist and assistant professor of philosophy at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, and first author of the paper, which was published as an opinion piece Wednesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association. 'They haven't been properly acknowledged in the past, and their participation in these studies was really foundational in launching the field of pharmacogenetics and, later on, precision medicine,' said Allen, who recently completed her doctorate at the University of Utah. Starting in the 1940s, researchers infected inmates at the Joliet-area prison with malaria to test the effectiveness of drugs to treat the illness as part of a U.S. military-funded effort to protect American troops overseas, according to the paper. A University of Chicago doctor was the principal investigator. The inmates consented to being part of the studies and were paid for their participation. At first, the research was greeted with enthusiasm. In 1945, Life magazine ran a spread about it, featuring a photo of a Stateville inmate with cups containing malaria-carrying mosquitoes pressed against his bare chest. The first line of the story reads, 'In three U.S. penitentiaries men who have been imprisoned as enemies of society are now helping science fight another enemy of society.' But as the years passed, attitudes began to shift. Questions arose about whether inmates could truly, freely consent to participate in medical experiments or whether they felt coerced into them because of their often dire circumstances. At the Nuremberg trials, defense attorneys for Nazi doctors introduced text and images from the Life article about Stateville prison, though an Illinois physician argued at the trials that the prisoners in Stateville consented to being part of medical research whereas Nazi prisoners did not, according to the JAMA paper. In the mid-1970s, news broke about a study at Tuskegee, in which Black men with syphilis went untreated for years — news that raised awareness of ethical problems in medical research. News outlets also began publishing more stories about prison research, according to the JAMA article. The Chicago Tribune published an article in 1973, in which an inmate participating in the Stateville malaria research said: 'I've been coerced into the project — for the money. Being here has nothing to do with 'doing good for mankind' … I didn't want to keep taking money from my family.' The experiments at Stateville came to a halt in the 1970s. A number of protections and regulations are now in place when it comes to research involving prisoners. Since the 1970s, the Stateville research has often been discussed and analyzed but little attention has been paid to its Black participants, said James Tabery, a medical ethicist and philosophy professor at the University of Utah who led the new research, which was funded by the federal National Institutes of Health. For a time, Black prisoners were excluded from the studies because of a myth that Black people were immune to malaria, Tabery said. Later on, once scientists had pinpointed the drug primaquine as an effective medication for malaria, they turned their attention to the question of why 5% to 10% of Black men experienced a violent reaction to the drug, according to the paper. Ultimately, the scientists were successful, finding that the adverse reaction was related to a specific genetic deficiency. 'There are people all over Chicago today that are getting tested, that clinicians are recommending they get a genetic test before they get prescribed a drug because they want to make sure that their patient isn't going to have an adverse reaction to the drug,' Tabery said. 'It's really sort of powerful and interesting that you can trace that approach to doing good clinical medicine right back to this particular moment and place and population.' But Tabery and Allen also found that the Black prisoners were not treated the same as the white prisoners who participated in research at Stateville. For one, they weren't paid as much as the white prisoners, the rationale being that the white prisoners were infected with malaria, whereas the Black prisoners were given the drug but not infected with the disease — though some of the Black prisoners got very ill after taking the medication, according to the paper. Also, researchers didn't protect the Black participants' privacy as well as they did for other participants. They published certain identifying information about the Black participants, such as initials, ages, heights and weights, whereas participants in the previous research were represented with case numbers, according to the paper. Researchers also recruited the Black prisoners' family members for the study, which they didn't do with earlier participants, according to the paper. 'You see them just doing things with the Black prisoners that they're not doing with the white prisoners,' Tabery said. Also, though scientists made an important discovery through the research on Black prisoners, the episode also highlights the difficulty that can occur in translating discoveries into real life help for patients. Though the World Health Organization now recommends genetic testing to protect people who are sensitive to antimalarials, many of the people who would benefit most from such testing still don't receive it because of financial barriers, supply chain issues and a lack of training, according to the paper. 'What we found is when you sort of shift to what was happening to the Black prisoners, these other lessons you hadn't thought of as being derivable from Stateville suddenly do become apparent,' Tabery said.
Newsweek
4 hours ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows States With the Worst Hospital Ratings
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. New data has revealed the states where hospital care is the worst ranked by patients. The study, led from the University of Utah, analyzed 3,286 hospitals across the country, using data from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, which ran from July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022. Patients were asked to rate ten specific aspects of their hospital stay, including how they felt about communication with doctors and nurses, how clean their rooms were, and whether they received adequate information upon discharge. States were given an average rating on a five-point scale, with five stars being the highest possible score. New York and South Carolina were rated the poorest—in New York, patients rated doctor communication and cleanliness a two, with all other rankings receiving a one; while South Carolina received a two on all rankings except for cleanliness, which received a one. South Dakota was the only state to receive a five-star rating, getting fives across the board apart except for "communications about medicines" and "care transition", which were both rated at four stars. While not displayed in the above map, Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico also recieved poor rankings, particularly in critical areas such as staff responsiveness and discharge information to patients. According to the researchers, the Midwest was the region with the most satisfied patients on average, with high scores around staff communication and hospital cleanliness in particular. As the study was conducted on patient reviews during the COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions, it noted that the healthcare issues may have changed or improved in the years since. However, the findings may still guide policymakers in efforts to emulate the outcomes of the highest-performing regions. "While one might expect no significant differences in patient satisfaction among hospitalized patients across the U.S., our findings revealed small but statistically significant regional variations," the team said in a statement. They added that disparities between states may indicate a need for policy reform or increased investment—such as funding hospital improvements or staff training initiatives. "These variations could also reflect unequal access to healthcare or differences in care quality among diverse populations." Despite this, the team noted that overall satisfaction and willingness to recommend a given hospital were "consistently rated moderately high" across the U.S., but "satisfaction scores were lowest for communication about medications and discharge information." Do you have a tip on a science story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have a question about health care? Let us know via science@ Reference Hung, M., Vu, S., Hon, E. S., Reese, L., Gardner, J., & Lipsky, M. S. (2025). Unveiling the drivers of patient satisfaction in the United States hospitals: Assessing quality indicators across regions. PLOS ONE, 20(6).
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Utah SNAP ban on soda gets green light, along with ‘MAHA' waivers for Idaho, Arkansas
U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. speaks to reporters during an event at the University of Utah on Monday, April 7, 2025. (Kyle Dunphey/Utah News Dispatch) U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, along with Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., signed three 'Make America Health Again' waivers on Tuesday, allowing three more states to enact restrictions to SNAP benefits. The move adds Utah, Idaho and Arkansas to the list of six states that have banned certain foods from being purchased with benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which is the U.S.'s largest nutrition assistance program. Arkansas approved to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits for soda, candy Utah's waiver prohibits using SNAP benefits to purchase 'soft drinks,' defined as 'a nonalcoholic beverage that is made with carbonated water and that is flavored and sweetened with sugar or artificial sweeteners,' according to HB403, the bill the Utah Legislature passed directing the state's Department of Workforce Services to request the waiver. An earlier version of the bill would have also blocked candy purchases, but Utah lawmakers narrowed its scope before approving the bill. Utah's SNAP restrictions, which will take effect Jan. 1, 2026, don't go as far as other states. Arkansas' waiver restricts SNAP participants from purchasing low- and no-calorie soda, fruit and vegetable drinks with less than 50% natural juice, and other 'unhealthy drinks,' along with 'confectionary products with flour and artificially sweetened candy, the Arkansas Advocate reported. Arkansas' waiver will take effect July 1, 2026. Idaho's waiver excludes soda and candy and will take effect the same day as Arkansas, on July 1. Rollins previously signed SNAP waivers for Nebraska, Iowa, and Indiana. The latest round of SNAP restriction approvals come amid a national movement coined 'Make America Healthy Again,' or MAHA, that's been promoted by U.S. health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In April, Kennedy stopped in Utah as part of his 'MAHA tour.' During his visit he praised Utah's SNAP ban, along with a slate of other 'MAHA bills,' which was headlined by Utah's first-in-the-nation law to ban cities from adding fluoride to drinking water. Idaho Legislature approves ban on SNAP coverage for candy, soda 'Thank you to the governors of Indiana, Arkansas, Idaho, Utah, Iowa, and Nebraska for their bold leadership and unwavering commitment to Make America Healthy Again,' Kennedy said in a news release issued Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 'I call on every governor in the nation to submit a SNAP waiver to eliminate sugary drinks — taxpayer dollars should never bankroll products that fuel the chronic disease epidemic.' Rollins, in a prepared statement, said the Trump administration is 'unified in improving the health of our nation.' 'America's governors have proudly answered the call to innovate by improving nutrition programs, ensuring better choices while respecting the generosity of the American taxpayer,' Rollins said. 'Each waiver submitted by the states and signed is yet another step closer to fulfilling President Trump's promise to Make America Healthy Again.' Critics of the SNAP restrictions, including Democrats and low-income advocates, argued states shouldn't restrict freedom of choice and should treat Americans like adults who can practice personal responsibility. A 'MAHA' bill is making its way through the Utah Legislature Food industry representatives have also expressed concerns about unintended consequences by limiting consumer choices and creating confusion about what can or can't be purchased in grocery stores. They also argued it isn't likely to improve health outcomes. But proponents from Republican-led states argued excluding 'unhealthy' foods from SNAP benefits was 'common sense.' The sponsor of Utah's bill, Rep. Kristen Chevrier, R-Highland, called it a 'no brainer' way to safeguard public health and stop 'subsidizing poison for kids.' In a post on X on Wednesday, Chevrier said Utah 'led the charge' by seeking the SNAP waiver while also passing HB402, another bill that banned public schools from serving food with certain food dyes and other additives in them. 'I was honored to sponsor both bills,' she wrote. 'This is the beginning of a critical and long-awaited cultural revolution.' During debate over Utah's bill, Rep. John Hawkins, R-Pleasant Grove, said he was initially hesitant to support the bill, saying he wasn't a 'huge proponent of the government stepping in and telling people what they can and can't consume with their food.' 'But as I thought about it,' Hawkins said in February, 'I've come to the conclusion that in this particular case, I think the government does have the right to say, 'We want you to be healthy and we want to set the parameters around what you can use government subsidies for.'' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
