Illinois clinic one of first places in the country to offer new device to spinal cord injury patients
Callahan has a spinal cord injury, so he wasn't supporting all of his own weight or moving his legs by himself. But something had changed. He had a little bit of sensation in his feet.
'It's pretty strange,' said Callahan, 22, of Lockport, who was injured as a passenger in a car accident 1 1/2 years ago. Since he started using the device with the electrodes, he said, he can feel his feet touching surfaces, though they still can't feel pain or temperature. 'I think there's definitely noticeable progress.'
The device, called the ARC-EX, delivers electrical pulses to his spine during his sessions at Next Steps Chicago, a neurological rehabilitation clinic in Willow Springs. The device was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in December, with some experts hailing it as a milestone in therapy for people with spinal cord injuries. Next Steps is one of the first two clinics in the country offering it.
'It's pretty miraculous,' said Mary Jones, a physical therapist and director of operations at Next Steps Chicago. 'I spent my career working toward this and to see it come to fruition is nothing short of amazing.'
Now, during Callahan's appointments at Next Steps, neuro-adaptive exercise specialist Creighton Goss attaches electrodes to the back of Callahan's neck along his cervical spine and then midway down his back, near his thoracic spine. Thin electrical cables connect the electrodes to the ARC-EX device, which delivers continuous electrical pulses throughout Callahan's appointment.
The stimulation doesn't hurt, but 'It definitely wakes you up,' Callahan said with a smile.
The ARC-EX is not the first device to deliver electrical stimulation through the skin to help people with spinal cord injuries. But unlike other commercially available devices, the ARC-EX delivers stimulation directly to the spine, rather than to other parts of the body that a person wishes to move, such as to an arm or a leg. The idea is to restore hand strength and sensation even when stimulation is no longer used.
The device is supposed to be used for up to an hour a day, alongside therapy or training, to help improve hand strength and sensation for people with incomplete spinal cord injuries. About two-thirds of people with spinal cord injuries in the U.S. have incomplete injuries, meaning that though their movement may be extremely limited, their spinal cords have not completely lost the ability to transmit messages to and from the brain.
'Some instruction from the brain gets through but not enough to create a movement, so we're providing an amplification of that signal from the brain,' said Dave Marver, CEO of Onward Medical, the company that sells the device.
Dr. Arun Jayaraman, executive director of the Technology & Innovation Hub at Chicago rehabilitation hospital Shirley Ryan AbilityLab, who is not involved with Next Steps, called the device 'an additional tool' that can be used to improve spinal cord signals to the limbs. He said it's the first device of its kind to be FDA-approved and available for everyday use by clinicians, rather than just for research purposes. The AbilityLab has an agreement to use the device for its research studies in stroke and other medical conditions later this year.
The device's FDA approval is 'huge' for the spinal cord injury community, said Marco Baptista, chief scientific officer with the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation, which helped support the device's development with an investment in Onward. Philanthropic venture fund SCI Ventures, which was co-founded by the foundation and other nonprofits, now holds that investment, and any revenue received from the investment will go toward supporting more research, Baptista said.
'One, this can be a device that can help people, and, two, it provides this path forward that other therapies can then follow,' Baptista said.
Next Steps Chicago, a standalone nonprofit, helped test an earlier version of the device and has always felt it's important to bring cutting-edge technologies into the community, Jones said.
'This is a catastrophic lifelong condition,' Jones said of spinal cord injuries. 'To make somebody's life a little bit easier, to give them 10% improvement, that's a big deal for someone who hasn't moved their arm or is dependent on someone else for round-the-clock care.'
The device costs clinics about $40,000, Marver said — not a small price tag, but also not the most expensive piece of equipment a clinic like Next Steps uses.
In a study funded by Onward and published in May in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Medicine, 72% of participants saw improved strength and function in their hands and arms after using the device. The FDA specifically approved the device to be used to improve hand sensation and strength.
Improving hand function is a priority for many people with spinal cord injuries, Marver said, sometimes even more so than regaining the ability to walk.
'They need their hands to get through activities of daily living, to feed themselves, to clothe themselves, to go to the bathroom,' Marver said. 'These are all things that introduce independence, dignity, quality of life.'
The device doesn't work for everyone, but so far Next Steps has seen about a dozen patients have positive results, including Callahan, Jones said. Though Callahan still has hand function, the device has helped with other areas of his body, Jones said.
Callahan said he'd been a patient at Next Steps for about a year when Jones asked him if he wanted to try the ARC-EX device.
'She was explaining the research behind it and the possible benefits of using it, and it seemed it was applicable to my injury, so I thought why not,' Callahan said.
Callahan uses a wheelchair and is paralyzed from the diaphragm down. After his accident, he spent about two months as an inpatient at AbilityLab and then another six months doing outpatient rehab with the AbilityLab.
Now, he goes to Next Steps about three times a week, for two hours at a time, where he practices movement in the treatment gym. At a recent appointment, Goss had him kneel in front of a low table, which he used to brace himself, using his arms. Goss then slowly helped Callahan move his legs back and forth, an exercise designed to help him practice shifting weight from one leg to the other.
Callahan isn't sure how much strength, movement or sensation he'll ever regain. Everyone and every injury is different. 'Nothing is guaranteed,' Callahan said, but he's trying to recover as much as he can.
'It would definitely improve my quality of life, not just for me, but for my family,' Callahan said of the prospect of regaining more function.
'We're hoping you walk in one day and say, 'Peace out, I'm done,'' Goss said. 'That would be the goal.'
'That would be the goal,' Callahan agreed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
7 hours ago
- Business Insider
FDA approves Apellis' Empaveli for treatment of C3 glomerulopathy
Apellis (APLS) Pharmaceuticals announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved EMPAVELI as the first treatment for C3 glomerulopathy or primary immune complex membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis in patients 12 years of age and older, to reduce proteinuria. C3G and primary IC-MPGN are rare kidney diseases, affecting 5,000 people in the United States. 'I'm excited to now have a highly effective therapy for a broad range of patients living with C3G and primary IC-MPGN,' said Carla Nester, M.D., MSA, FASN, lead principal investigator for the VALIANT study, professor of internal medicine and pediatrics and director of pediatric nephrology, University of Iowa Stead Family Children's Hospital. 'With standard of care, patients living with these rare and severe diseases frequently progress to kidney failure, necessitating lifelong dialysis and/or a kidney transplant. Given the urgent need, particularly in children, the approval of EMPAVELI marks a pivotal moment in the treatment of rare kidney diseases.' In the Phase 3 VALIANT study, EMPAVELI demonstrated an unprecedented 68% reduction in proteinuria, stabilization of kidney function, and substantial clearance of C3 deposits as measured by C3 staining, compared to placebo. The positive results were consistent across adolescent and adult patients with C3G and primary IC-MPGN, and in C3G patients with post-transplant disease recurrence.
Miami Herald
15 hours ago
- Miami Herald
FDA is coming for your Doritos, Oreos, and other favorite snacks
Growing up, Oreos were my thing. Every day after dinner, I'd open the fridge (yes, I liked them cold), grab two from the sleeve, and savor them slowly. Even in college, when I barely had groceries, I always had Oreos. I loved trying every new flavor that hit shelves - Mint was my favorite. They were reliable. Comforting. A little ritual I didn't think twice about. But over the past few years, I've shifted how I eat. Less processed, more whole foods. Not perfect, but intentional. And slowly, Oreos stopped showing up in my pantry. Related: FDA eliminates 52 food standards in sweeping deregulation move Then one weekend, I was visiting my niece and nephew. They were showing me their snack stash and pulled out one of the new limited-edition Oreo flavors. Obviously, I had to try it. Once an Oreo girlie, always an Oreo girlie - right? I bit in. And I literally spit it out. It tasted…fake. Like chemicals wrapped in a memory. And I couldn't stop thinking about it. How did something I loved so much now feel so off? How had my taste changed that much? Had my taste buds finally woken up to just how ultra-processed and sugary it really was? Turns out, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration might finally be thinking the same thing. Image source: rblfmr/Shutterstock Under the leadership of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke L. Rollins, the FDA just launched a major initiative to define what counts as an "ultra-processed food." This may sound simple, but it's a massive shift. Right now, there's no official federal definition for ultra-processed food. That means your snack labels may tell you about sugar or fat, but they don't say a word about how chemically engineered or heavily modified those foods really are. This new FDA push? It's part of a broader strategy to tackle what they're calling a chronic disease crisis. Related: These clean food brands are rightfully challenging the FDA According to the government, roughly 70% of packaged foods in the U.S. qualify as ultra-processed. And kids get over 60% of their daily calories from them. Dozens of studies have linked these products to obesity, diabetes, cancer, and neurological conditions. The agency has now issued a formal Request for Information to help develop a national definition. That may sound wonky - but it's the first step toward labeling, regulating, and potentially warning consumers about what they're actually eating. Honestly, this feels like something we can all get behind. FDA Commissioner Marty Makary called the issue "clear and convincing," noting that the health threats from ultra-processed foods are too serious to ignore. This isn't just about what we eat. It's about how food companies will be allowed to operate moving forward. Once a federal definition is in place, it could open the door to all kinds of new policies: mandatory labeling, advertising restrictions, school food reform, even reformulations of the products themselves. If a company can't market its cereal, frozen meals, or snacks without acknowledging they're ultra-processed, it changes how they sell food in America - if they even still can. This move could also shift consumer behavior. Just like "organic" or "low fat" once influenced the way people shop, "ultra-processed" might soon become a new red flag on store shelves. Of course, some of the biggest food companies in the country are watching this closely. For them, this isn't just a definition. It's a threat to the foundation of their business model. And for those of us who grew up with those brightly colored boxes in the pantry, it could mean the snacks we thought we knew are about to change for good. If this shift helps make eating clean more accessible, I'm all for it. Related: Ziploc, Rubbermaid face alarming lawsuits over food safety risks The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Chicago Tribune
3 days ago
- Chicago Tribune
Rush now offers a blood test to help detect more than 50 types of cancer, as other health systems remain wary
Jack Welter didn't feel sick when he agreed to take a new blood test that looks for multiple types of cancer. But, approaching 60, he thought it couldn't hurt. To his surprise, the test came back positive. Welter then underwent multiple rounds of follow-up tests, and ultimately, doctors found cancer in his throat. The now 61-year-old Elkhart, Indiana, resident endured radiation and chemotherapy in 2023 and is now cancer-free. 'Without that test, I still would have had (cancer), obviously, but it might not have appeared for another year or more,' said Welter, who is expecting his first grandchild. 'Early detection is the key to success.' In recent years, the blood test, called Galleri, and others like it, have been gaining momentum among doctors who use them to help detect cancers that otherwise might go unnoticed until patients become ill. Now, at least one local health system, Rush University System for Health, has decided to start offering Galleri to patients widely in hopes of finding cancer early, when it's easier to treat. The test has not yet been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and is not covered by most health insurance plans. At Rush, it will cost most people $749 out-of-pocket. Providers at other local health systems have expressed wariness about offering the test broadly at this point, given those concerns and others. But Rush leaders felt it was important to move forward with the test, given its potential life-changing benefits for patients and because of its performance in clinical trials, said Dr. Lisa Stempel, director of the high-risk cancer screening program at Rush. 'The goal of all screening is to find cancer early when we can treat it,' said Stempel, who noted that 1 in 3 people will get cancer in their lifetimes. 'It's such a simple test in the fact that it can find so many cancers and the fact that it can find it in early stages is what's extremely exciting to me.' The test works by identifying DNA in the bloodstream that's shed by cancer cells. It can detect a cancer signal shared by more than 50 types of cancer, and it can also reveal roughly where in the body the cancer might be. A positive result is not the same as a diagnosis. If a patient gets a positive result, the patient must undergo additional testing, such as CT scans or PET scans, to help assess if they really have cancer. There's a 43% chance that a positive test result will be cancer, according to a study from Grail, the company that makes the Galleri test. The test has a false positive rate of 0.5% among patients who don't have cancer, meaning about 1 out of every 200 people who take the test and don't have cancer might still get a positive result. The test is only available by prescription, and it's recommended annually by Grail for people at higher risk of cancer, such as those ages 50 and older. Rush is also offering it to younger adults with risk factors such as a family history of cancer, smoking, diabetes or obesity. If a patient gets a positive result but doctors can't find any cancer, Grail offers a second test to the patient free of charge. That's what happened to Welter, the Indiana patient who had throat cancer. The first time he took the test, it came back positive for cancer somewhere between his chest and head, he said. But more traditional follow-up tests didn't turn up any cancer. He then took a second, free Galleri test about six months later and, again, it was positive. He underwent more testing, and the second time around, doctors found the cancer. 'At that point in time it was so small they really couldn't pinpoint it,' Welter said of doctors' efforts to find the cancer after his first Galleri test. Welter has been speaking to doctors at Rush about his experience in recent months as part of their training to offer the tests to patients widely. Welter said he hasn't been paid by Grail nor Rush. 'To me it's amazing the test could actually find something like that,' Welter said. Not everyone, however, is as gung-ho about the test. Though health systems in other parts of the U.S. are also offering Galleri, some Chicago-area health systems and providers say they don't believe the test is ready for prime time. Northwestern Medicine is not systematically offering the Galleri test at this point, with a spokesperson saying, 'The technology isn't sufficiently sensitive and specific enough for us to use this as a screening tool at this time.' Feighanne Hathaway, a genetic counselor at UChicago Medicine, said she also has a number of concerns. For one, she worries that the out-of-pocket cost creates more disparities in health care. She also worries that the test may be less adept at picking up signals for early-stage cancers than later stage ones, raising questions about its usefulness and value. A Grail study found that 48% of confirmed cancers detected by Galleri were stages 1 or 2, and that adding Galleri to standard-of-care screening about doubled the number of cancers detected. Hathaway also fears that if a patient gets a negative test result, they may think they can forgo screenings such as mammograms and colonoscopies. Rush and Grail caution that the test is not meant to replace routine screenings. Largely, though, she's concerned that the test is not yet approved by the FDA. Hathaway said she likes the idea of the test, but, 'I just don't think we're there yet.' 'I think more research needs to be done before we start offering it,' Hathaway said. So far, more than 380,000 people are or already have participated in studies of Galleri, according to Rush. That includes a recently completed trial with 140,000 participants in the United Kingdom. The company is also sponsoring a clinical trial that's now seeking to enroll an additional 50,000 Medicare beneficiaries to test whether Galleri can help find cancer early and decrease the number of late-stage cancer diagnoses. Though Galleri is not approved by the FDA, Grail said it has been granted breakthrough device designation by the agency, which is meant to speed up development and review of devices that can more effectively treat or diagnose life-threatening and debilitating conditions. The company expects to finish submitting information to the FDA next year for premarket approval. 'Now, for the first time we've got breakthrough technology that can find cancer in adults who have no idea they have cancer, they have no symptoms, there's no suspicion of cancer, and we can look for more than those five cancers,' said Dr. Joshua Ofman, president of Grail, referring to the cancers that now have recommended screening tools, such as mammograms for breast cancer and colonoscopies for colorectal cancer. 'We can look for all the other cancers that are taking people's lives, because when you can find cancer early that is your best chance to cure it,' Ofman. Many patients feel the same way. Peter Crowell, 65 of Bucktown, was among the first group of Rush patients to sign up this month to be tested. After his primary care doctor mentioned it, Crowell made an appointment to get his blood drawn. 'He asked me if I was interested, given my history, so I said, 'Yeah,'' Crowell said, noting he has a family history of cancer. 'It's just something I think I'd rather be proactive about.' Of course, Crowell wishes insurance would pay for it, but he's willing to shell out the $749 for the test. He said he'll likely pay for it using a flexible spending account. 'If I can find out if I have any of those markers, then it will be worth it,' Crowell said. Maggie Hornung, a nurse practitioner at Rush, recently had her blood drawn for the test. It takes about three to four weeks to get results. 'I obviously was excited as a provider to start offering this and working on this but as a patient I absolutely wanted to proceed,' said Hornung, 58. She wanted to take the test because she's had family members with cancer, and because of what she's seen in her work with patients in the high-risk breast cancer clinic at Rush. 'To me, $749 is a small cost compared to what things could be,' Hornung said.
