“We feel very fortunate to have the opportunity to be part of this exciting research and look forward to working with all of our participant volunteers,” says Ilana Katz Sand, MD
For those living with multiple sclerosis (MS), GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) might represent a new mechanism for combating disease progression. Though initially developed for diabetes treatment, GLP-1 agents have become famous for inducing weight loss. However, the investigators behind the TAG-MS clinical trial, now recruiting patients at The Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis, are hopeful that GLP-1 RAs will demonstrate therapeutic benefits beyond their metabolic impact.
The study drug, NLY01, is a modified version of an existing GLP1-RA that has already been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The modified drug exhibits a key difference: NLY01 maintains a significantly higher sustained concentration in the body and has other characteristics that enable it to more readily cross the blood-brain barrier. Given the widespread presence of GLP-1 receptors in the brain, this property led investigators to hypothesize that NLY01 may be able to directly target the central nervous system inflammation implicated in neurodegeneration.
This theory has a solid scientific foundation: In a mouse model of brain inflammation commonly used to study MS, investigators found that NLY01 administration had anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective properties. They proposed that by reducing peripheral and central inflammation, the neurodegeneration that is a hallmark of progressive MS can be slowed.
Researchers have also expanded beyond mouse models. In a previous study of patients with Parkinson’s disease, the study drug showed improved clinical outcomes compared to a placebo control. Additionally, in a recent trial in Alzheimer’s disease, a GLP-1 agent resulted in a slower reduction in brain volume.
At first glance, research in Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease may seem far removed from MS. However, Ilana Katz Sand, MD, Associate Director of the MS Center and Associate Professor of Neurology, emphasizes that while Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s are distinct diseases from MS, they do share common pathways with regard to neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration. “Recent research in these conditions strengthens our rationale for studying them in MS,” she says.
Building on this scientific rationale, Ellen Mowry, MD, of Johns Hopkins University designed a new phase 2 study, funded by the International Progressive MS Alliance, to investigate these mechanisms. At Mount Sinai, Dr. Katz Sand is the principal investigator behind the study.
The overall aim of the TAG-MS study is to investigate whether NLY01 can protect against neurodegeneration in people living with MS. The study is a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Approximately 40 participants enrolled at Mount Sinai will self-administer weekly injections of either the study drug or a placebo over the course of two years.
“In a randomized controlled trial, a computer program assigns whether each participant receives the active drug or the placebo,” says Dr. Katz Sand. “The study team cannot choose the treatment assignment, and no one involved with the study will even know the assignment until the study concludes… to avoid introducing bias into the results. However, regardless of whether participants receive the study drug or the placebo, all participants will remain on their current MS disease-modifying therapy and also receive lifestyle behavioral therapy by trained nurses, as well as a free Fitbit.”
The primary goal of the study is to measure how much brain volume is retained over time. A “decrease in brain volume is part of normal aging, but we know that people who live with MS can have a slightly greater rate of decrease than those who don’t,” says Dr. Katz Sand. “This is somewhat correlated with worsening of MS-related disability over time. Disease-modifying therapies can help partially protect the brain, and we hope to find that NLY01 provides additional protection from brain volume loss.”
In addition to monitoring brain volume with three MRIs over the two-year study period, additional data will be collected through OCT scans, blood samples, clinical assessments and questionnaires, and Fitbit devices. While the primary goal of TAG-MS is to evaluate whether NLY01 can slow brain volume loss, these additional health measures may provide valuable insight into how the treatment affects disease progression more broadly.
With enrollment now underway at Mount Sinai, Dr. Katz Sand is enthusiastic about beginning this new study.
“Interventions that protect against neurodegeneration are critically needed to delay, prevent, and slow progression in MS,” she says. “TAG-MS approaches this important issue from a totally new angle. We feel very fortunate to have the opportunity to be part of this exciting research and look forward to working with all of our participant volunteers.”
If you’re wondering if you’re eligible, take a look at the table below to determine if you fit the study criteria. Please don’t hesitate to reach out to coordinators Diya Pandey (diya.pandey@mssm.edu) and Chelsea Seidel (chelsea.seidel@mssm.edu) if you have any questions.
By Chelsea Seidel and Diya Pandey, research coordinators at The Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson MS Center
Scott Mellis, MD, PhD, has lived with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) for more than 20 years under the care of doctors at The Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis at Mount Sinai. It has not always been easy.
He has one message for anyone diagnosed with the chronic condition: “Be hopeful, recognize that you can have a good and productive life despite the MS.”
For him, that has meant a successful career as a medical researcher and, more recently, an active life in retirement dedicated to his lifelong passion for birdwatching and stargazing and committed to expanding opportunities for others like him living with MS or other disabilities. This includes a project to make it easier for others to obtain special equipment so they can continue to enjoy hobbies such as observing nature and the stars.
For much of his adult life, Dr. Mellis, had no serious health concerns. But he experienced a dramatic change after he slipped and fell during the winter of 2005, and a few months later his left-hand fingers “felt like they were moving through molasses” while playing the guitar. A friend suggested he see a neurologist, and after an MRI, he was told he has MS.
“I was 51 years old when the diagnosis was made. A bit of a shock,” he recalls.
Soon after, he attended a Keystone Symposia on MS, a scientific conference that brings together researchers and clinicians to share advances in research and treatment. As a trained rheumatologist and immunologist whose medical career focused on treatments that could be helpful to people, he found the conference beneficial for understanding MS. Health care professionals he met there strongly recommended The Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis. Aaron Miller, MD, the Center’s Medical Director, has been “my neurologist and counselor for 20 years,” he says.
“The sheer beauty of nature and birds, the awesomeness of celestial objects, provides a lot of comfort. People with MS have a lot of challenges, and a few moments of awe and wonder can really bring a lot of joy to one’s life.” — Scott Mellis, MD, PhD
How and when to disclose your MS to others is one of the first decisions people newly diagnosed have to encounter. Dr. Mellis kept his condition private for about a year. “I was fortunate to have a wonderfully supportive wife and family, and eventually I told my kids,” he says.
At Regeneron Pharmaceuticals in Tarrytown, New York, where Mellis headed the Department of Translational Medicine, he initially did not disclose his condition. But within a year “I became the guy riding around the office in the mobility scooter,” he recalls.
Colleagues were very supportive, and he was able to continue his leadership position researching and developing new drugs. Determined to not allow his progressive MS to hinder his career, he continued to work at Regeneron for another 15 years after his diagnosis.
Since retiring in early 2026, Dr. Mellis has pursued a mix of medically related work and his lifelong passions for birdwatching and stargazing. He was selected earlier this year to serve on the engagement coordination team of the International Progressive MS Alliance, a consortium of organizations from countries around the world that support MS research. In June, he traveled to Milan, Italy, for his first in-person meeting with the team, comprised of individuals who can share perspectives on living with MS and help advise the Alliance on deciding research priorities.
With his secondary progressive MS, he had to give up his favorite pastimes of cycling and playing tennis and squash.
“Once I developed MS, my new action sport became filling the bird feeder,” he says. “I liked to watch the birds at the feeder and started setting up binoculars to get a close-up view and try to take photographs of birds at the feeders.”
But he noticed that as his MS progressed, it became increasingly difficult to hold a pair of binoculars, or carry a tripod with a spotting scope that birders use, or set up a telescope to look at the stars.
Motivated to pursue his birdwatching and stargazing passions, he began to tinker at home with a parallelogram mount, an apparatus that uses a swing arm to position binoculars or a small telescope in front of your eyes and hold them there hands-free. “You can sit comfortably and enjoy a beautiful view of nature or the night sky,” he says.
Friends at the Audubon Society and the Westchester Amateur Astronomers club, two organizations he has long been active in were quick to help. For participants in the National MS Society’s Westchester Walk last May, the team set up six optic stations, a combination of binoculars and spotting scopes on parallelogram mounts as well as larger telescopes. “For people living with disability to be able to use these tools is really transformative” he says.
To share his knowledge and experience adapting equipment to appreciate nature, Dr. Mellis created an initiative called the Boundless Skies Alliance, and he is developing a website for people with MS or other disabilities to learn more about how to obtain and use readily available equipment to make these hobbies accessible. (Those seeking more information can contact him at sjmellis@gmail.com.)
“The sheer beauty of nature and birds, the awesomeness of celestial objects, provides a lot of comfort,” he says. “People with MS have a lot of challenges and a few moments of awe and wonder can really bring a lot of joy to one’s life.”
By Kenneth Bandler, a multiple sclerosis patient, advocate, and member of The Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis Advisory Board.
You may be hearing a lot about peptides—supplements that can help with muscle repair and boost your immune system. But many man-made (synthetic) peptides haven’t been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and there are questions about whether they are safe.
In this Q&A, endocrinologist Reshmi Srinath, MD, Director of the Mount Sinai Weight and Metabolism Management Program, explains what peptide supplements do and whether they are safe and effective.
What are peptides?
Peptides are natural substances that your body makes. They are chains of amino acids, which are molecules that combine to form proteins. Proteins help your body grow, repair itself, and stay healthy.
What are the most common types of peptides that doctors prescribe?
The three peptides that doctors safely prescribe are insulin, oxytocin, and GLP-1s.
Insulin helps your body turn food into energy. It also keeps your blood sugar at a healthy level. People with diabetes may need insulin if their bodies don’t make enough insulin or can’t use it correctly.
Oxytocin helps during labor and breastfeeding. It also helps us feel calm, trusting, and emotionally stable. Doctors may use oxytocin when women are giving birth to help start or strengthen labor contractions.
GLP–1s regulate blood sugar and tell your brain when you’ve had enough to eat. Doctors might prescribe a GLP-1 (such as Wegovy® or Zepbound®) to suppress your appetite, slow digestion, and help you lose weight.
Your body makes all of these peptides naturally. Peptides prescribed by doctors are made in scientific laboratories under careful supervision.
Reshmi Srinath, MD
Why are people talking about peptides on social media?
Thanks to social media “wellness” influencers, who often are not medical professionals, there is growing interest in synthetic peptides. These influencers often talk about how synthetic peptides can affect healthy aging, healing, muscle repair, and our immune system.
The peptides they recommend often come in the form of pills or shots. They are usually made in compounding pharmacies, which are not as well-regulated as scientific labs. Given the unknowns, you should speak with your doctor to understand any potential risks.
Are synthetic peptides safe and effective?
We don’t know. These peptides are not FDA approved. Not enough studies have been done to know if synthetic peptides are safe. And most of the studies that have been done are on animals, not humans. In addition, scientists have not studied what doses are appropriate and whether these peptides are safe in the long term.
Another concern is that most synthetic peptides are made in compounding pharmacies. These facilities don’t have the same level of FDA monitoring and oversight as scientific labs. This may increase the risk of contamination.
It is also important to know who is prescribing these peptides and whether they are licensed.
Why are peptides so popular?
People are always interested in how to improve their health, live longer, and help our bodies heal. The recent success of GLP-1 medications for weight management has also fueled interest in peptides, but the safety of GLP-1s is backed by significant research.
When it comes to peptide supplements, there is still not much that is understood. I do not support use of synthetic peptides that have not been FDA approved. I recommend caution—you are using them at your own risk. We hope these peptides will be studied more vigorously under FDA guidance.
The White Coat Ceremony formally marks the start of students on their medical career path. On Friday, July 31, the class of 2030 of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai gathered at the Ziegfeld Ballroom in Manhattan to receive their trainee coats.
The incoming class is joining a field that is undergoing transformation, Eric J. Nestler, MD, PhD, Anne and Joel Ehrenkranz Dean of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, told the students.
“Preparing for that responsibility is the reason why you’re undertaking this great intellectual journey into biomedicine—a journey at a moment of extraordinary change,” said Dr. Nestler. “We are at an inflection point for both medicine and medical education.”
Artificial intelligence (AI) is not only redefining the limits of what physicians and researchers can understand about the human body but also changing how students learn and retrieve information.
“Mastering medicine today is substantially different from what was required for my generation, but an extensive, deep understanding of biology in health and disease will always be essential,” noted Dr. Nestler.
Another thing that stays consistent is the human element, said David C. Thomas, MD, MS, MHPE, Dean for Medical Education, Icahn School of Medicine, in an interview after the ceremony.
“There’s a lot of change now in medicine. The technology is changing. We have AI coming in and changing” the field, Dr. Thomas said. “However, the stable part of that is going to be the person, and so that’s the human side of the medical student’s professional identity as they participate in the changes that are going on in the technology, in the way we practice medicine.”
Class of 2030 By the Numbers
130
Class size
7,687
Number of traditional entry applications
10
Students with a master’s
16
First-generation college students
519
Median MCAT score of class
3.95
Median GPA of class
For many students, donning the white coat is a continuation of their undergraduate studies. But for some who decided to switch fields to medicine, that garment represents a big shift in their professional identities.
“As I settled into my job as an engineer, I looked back at my most meaningful memories during college and noticed they often involved patient interactions,” said Mihir Dixit, class of 2030, who had experience as an EMT in his undergraduate days and worked at an AI health care startup before entering the Icahn School of Medicine.
Lily Steckel, class of 2030, said, “While I started my professional career in management consulting, medicine has long been ingrained in my life—I grew up with doctors in my family. However, it wasn’t until the end of college when I began to see how my own path would lead me” toward medicine.
Click on each student’s name to read more about their career shifts to medicine, and what becoming a doctor means to them.
Mihir Dixit (left), volunteered as an EMT during his time as an undergraduate student. He became an engineer at an AI startup before switching to medicine.
What led you to decide to switch to medicine?
I started my undergrad considering medicine, actually, and entered the University of California, San Diego as a biology major and became an EMT to determine whether I would enjoy working in a medical environment. While I loved being an EMT, I experienced my first loss of a patient and spent some time thinking about how I could prevent that outcome in the future.
I eventually switched my major to bioengineering in hopes of making medical devices that could assist health care providers as they treat patients. Engineering became one of my primary interests throughout college, and the prospect of a career where I could impact patient populations with the technology I would create was incredibly enticing.
I then pursued a Master in Personalized Medicine and Applied Engineering at Yale University, during which I helped develop an AI model that predicted patients’ response to lung cancer treatments based on their PET scans. After graduating, I worked as an engineer at an AI health care startup for one year, collaborating with physicians to make large language models safer in patient-facing and clinical environments.
There were a few moments that led me on the path to medicine, but I only realized they were definitive long after they had passed. As I settled into my job as an engineer, I looked back at my most meaningful memories during college and noticed they often involved patient interactions—seeing a cardiologist review every patient chart the night before seeing the patient the next day; watching an Emergency Department physician calmly resolve a quarrel between a patient and their family members.
I realized that while innovation was important as an engineer, physicians have a unique impact on a patient’s life beyond medical treatment. I wanted to combine my engineering knowledge with the reach of a physician and decided to switch to medicine.
What was it like for you to treat patients as an EMT?
Being in the back of an ambulance with a patient—often in a one-on-one setting—means you bear the responsibility of their care for the duration of that ride. It lends to conversations where patients confide in you about their fears, concerns, and sometimes just whatever’s on their mind.
I felt honored to be there for my patients in some of the worst times of their lives, and for me, that privilege was the most memorable aspect of being an EMT.
Was it difficult making the switch to apply to medical schools?
My biggest concern was learning how to memorize so many seemingly random facts. But I quickly realized through talking to professors that it’s actually a lot of systems-based thinking, which I had already been used to as an engineer!
And because I had a biology-adjacent major in undergrad, the MCAT exam and prerequisite courses for matriculation had a slight overlap, so many of the requirements were thankfully already met. While I didn’t have any physician mentors in my immediate family, I’m thankful to have had research supervisors who were physicians who served as mentors for me during the application process.
What made you decide to apply to the Icahn School of Medicine?
It’s hard to beat getting your medical education in New York City. I was excited by the notion of training in one of the most diverse cities in the world and wanted to learn how to interact with and understand the needs of a wide variety of patient populations.
Mount Sinai also has one of the strongest computational research departments in the country, and after reading some of the research they had been publishing in the digital health field, it became one of my top choices when applying.
What are you looking forward to as you begin your medical career?
I’m looking forward to learning medical concepts in depth. I find it satisfying when I finally gain an extensive understanding of an entire system or pathway and everything “clicks,” and it seems like my journey through medicine will have a lot of those moments.
I’m also excited to be able to do more for patients—the biggest issue I had with being an EMT was that I didn’t have the knowledge or skills to do more for them. As for a particular direction, I’m considering cardiology or emergency medicine as potential specialties, but that’s not set in stone.
Lily Steckel (third from right, back row), with her starting cohort of peers during her time as a consultant. Her experience volunteering at a mother/baby postpartum floor helped cement her decision to switch fields to medicine.
What led you to decide to switch to medicine?
After graduating from Dartmouth College, I moved to San Francisco to work at Oliver Wyman, a management consulting firm that specializes in the financial services sector, and I worked as a consultant for two years.
During my time at Oliver Wyman, I started volunteering at the California Pacific Medical Center, a regional hospital in San Francisco. I worked on the mother/baby postpartum floor and was in charge of patient discharges and setting up rooms. That experience confirmed my decision to apply to postbaccalaureate programs to fulfill my dream of becoming a doctor.
While I started my professional career in management consulting, medicine has long been ingrained in my life—I grew up with doctors in my family. However, it wasn’t until the end of college when I began to see how my own path would lead me there.
My major in college was quantitative social science, which emphasized the use of quantitative data to explain real-world social issues. I had an interest in health-related topics and studied the pandemic’s effect on alcohol use among college students for my thesis. My research found that the pandemic’s isolation affected students’ drinking habits once they returned to campus, and through open conversations with my peers, I realized my sense of purpose hinges on helping in tangible, personal ways.
As I learned about the social dimensions of health, I was also drawn to understanding the biological underpinnings of disease, curious to learn not just how people are affected by it, but also why. This amalgamation of scientific curiosity and dedication to service led me to apply to medical schools.
How did having doctors in your family help with your decision to switch fields?
My dad and uncle are doctors, as was my grandfather. I was able to seek advice from all three during my pivot to medicine. Once I decided to pursue medical school, I immediately knew I had made the right decision.
When I would think about my future career as a doctor, I felt a sense of security because I knew I had landed on the right path.
Was it difficult making the switch to apply to medical schools?
I started the Postbaccalaureate Premedical Program at Bryn Mawr College, where I completed all of the scientific requirements for medical school in one year.
And to further prepare for my time in medicine, this past year I worked as a research assistant for the International Center for the Study of Breast Cancer Subtypes at Weill Cornell Medicine.
What made you decide to apply to the Icahn School of Medicine?
The Icahn School of Medicine stood out to me for its tight-knit community and happy demeanor among the students. I was also drawn to the school being born out of a hospital instead of an academic institution because it meant I would walk the same halls as patients and physicians every day.
Now that I’m here, it’s clear to me that Mount Sinai is a unique place to pursue my medical degree. The access to research and clinical opportunities is unmatched, and the student body is collaborative and supportive, which is exactly what I wanted in a medical school.
What are you looking forward to as you begin your medical career?
I’m most interested in pursuing a surgical oncology specialty. My research experience this past year at the International Center for the Study of Breast Cancer Subtypes involved investigating racial and ethnic disparities in breast cancer, focusing on why women of western sub-Saharan African descent are more likely to develop aggressive tumors than white women.
I would love to pursue a career in surgical oncology, where I can combine research on breast cancer disparities with the opportunity to care for women throughout their treatment.
Holding the ceremonial scissors are Mount Sinai CEO Brendan G. Carr, MD, MA, MS, and Mount Sinai Trustee Carolyn Rowan, whose philanthropic gift made the Center possible. They were joined by Center leaders, from left, Anna Barbieri, MD; Francesco Callipari, MD; Joanne Stone, MD, MS; and Denise Berdebes.
For too many women, health care has meant piecing it together alone: one specialist for hormones, another for heart health, a third for sleep, and no one connecting the dots. From pre-pregnancy planning and early reproductive health through postpartum recovery, midlife perimenopause and menopause, and the decades beyond, specialists in cardiovascular, bone, metabolic, mental, sexual, and pelvic health work together under one roof as a genuinely integrated team to provide coordinated care.
On Wednesday, May 27, Mount Sinai celebrated a different way forward, cutting the ribbon on the Carolyn Rowan Center for Women’s Health and Wellness, a new 11,000-square-foot multidisciplinary facility at 1427 Madison Avenue on Manhattan’s Upper East Side.
The celebration brought together Mount Sinai leadership, staff, and community supporters to commemorate this meaningful achievement.
Joanne Stone, MD, MS, left, and Anna Barbieri, MD
Joanne Stone, MD, MS, Howard C. Katz Chair of the Raquel and Jaime Gilinski Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Science at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, welcomed attendees and shared why the day meant so much to her.
“For me, this mission is deeply personal because throughout my career as a physician and maternal-fetal medicine specialist, I’ve seen how disconnected women’s health care can be. Women are often expected to navigate complex health issues on their own—moving between specialists, retelling their stories, and struggling to find truly coordinated care. We wanted to create something different,” she said.
Speakers included Brendan Carr, MD, MA, MS, Chief Executive Officer, Mount Sinai Health System; Carolyn Rowan, Founding Donor; Anna Barbieri, MD, Clinical Strategy Leader for the Rowan Women’s Health Center; and Francesco Callipari, MD, the Center’s Medical Director. Each spoke to the same vision: care built around the woman, not the system. After the remarks and the ribbon cutting, guests toured the Center.
What This Means for You
At the Center, specialists practice as one coordinated team, guided by a single, complete picture of your health. This is care that sees the whole you.
For generations, much of the foundational knowledge in modern medicine has been built on research conducted primarily on men. However, women’s bodies are profoundly different from men’s at the hormonal, cellular, and organ system levels. Because women have historically been underrepresented in clinical studies, major gaps remain in our understanding of how diseases develop, how symptoms appear, and how treatments affect female patients.
Heart disease is a powerful example of this disparity. Early research focused almost entirely on male patients, leading doctors to be trained to recognize the symptoms typically experienced by men during heart attacks. It took years for the medical community to fully understand that women often have very different warning signs.
In fact, women were largely excluded from early clinical trials in the United States until policy changes in the 1990s required their inclusion, according to Leslee J. Shaw, PhD, an internationally renowned researcher and Director of the Blavatnik Family Women’s Health Research Institute.
“These gaps in knowledge are still affecting care today. Even though women in the United States visit doctors more often than men and live longer, they experience higher rates of chronic illness and poorer overall health,” says Dr. Shaw, who is also Professor of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Science, and Medicine (Cardiology), and Vice Chair for Research in the Raquel and Jaime Gilinski Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Science at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.
But a major shift is underway.
At the Carolyn Rowan Center for Women’s Health and Wellness, advancing women’s health is grounded in a deep commitment to evidence-based medicine and innovative scientific discovery by supporting groundbreaking research and helping close longstanding gaps in medical knowledge.
Writing a New Chapter
Researchers at the Blavatnik Family Women’s Health Research Institute at the Icahn School of Medicine, led by Dr. Shaw, are creating “HERstory”—an initiative to reframe history and build a deeper understanding of women’s health. They are studying the unique biological differences and life experiences that shape women’s bodies over time. This includes a dedicated focus on conditions that disproportionately affect women, such as autoimmune disorders, diabetes, heart disease, chronic pain, and depression. Importantly, it means ensuring women are included in all aspects of clinical research.
“Even though women in the United States visit doctors more often than men and live longer, they experience higher rates of chronic illness and poorer overall health,” says Leslee J. Shaw, PhD.
A New Way to Evaluate Women’s Health Risks
Doctors are rethinking how to evaluate health risks for female patients. This new approach combines evaluating traditional biomarkers—such as blood pressure and glucose control—with hormonal health transitions unique to women, including pregnancy, postpartum, and menopause.
By examining patterns across a woman’s reproductive and overall health history—what researchers call “HERstory”—they hope to uncover early warning signs of chronic diseases before symptoms become serious.
What Researchers Want to Understand
Mount Sinai researchers are closely tracking a range of female-specific symptoms, including:
Menstrual and pelvic pain
Menopausal hot flashes and night sweats
Headaches and migraines
Atypical chest pain
Brain fog and cognitive changes
They will also track lifestyle factors such as sleep, exercise, and stress management. By connecting these pieces, the researchers hope to identify early signals of potential health risks and intervene sooner.
The Ultimate Goal
The ultimate goal is to help women remain healthy throughout every stage of life, according to Dr. Shaw.
“By connecting the dots across a woman’s lifespan at the Rowan Women’s Health Center, this research will improve how chronic diseases are prevented, diagnosed, and treated for generations to come,” she says.
