Clinical Neurosciences is one of the largest and most diverse departments for clinical study at Cambridge. This week we have a chat with PhD student Ellen Marie Sheridan.

She studies with us at: the NIHR HealthTech Research Centre in Brain Injury.
Exploring: Rapid tests for brain tumours during operations.
Her supervisor is: Neurosurgeon Professor Stephen Price.

Interview with Ellen

What interested you in studying neuroscience at Cambridge?

“My path to neuroscience and a PhD was definitely not a straight one. I actually started out in biochemical engineering back in Ireland, and after a gap year (and a lot of self-reflection), I realised I wanted to do something more personal, something that connects directly to people. I went on to study neuroscience for five years at University of Aberdeen, and through that (plus an industrial placement in a medical device company) I realised I didn’t just want to learn neuroscience (although I still love that part), I wanted to actively and independently work on questions that could genuinely change what happens to patients. That’s what made a PhD feel like the right next step for me. I specifically wanted a lab where the science links directly to neurosurgery and clinical outcomes, so working with Professor Stephen Price felt like a perfect fit. And yeah, a slightly cheesy reason, I wanted to be somewhere that would push me to become the best scientist I can be, learning from people who are leading the field. I’ve always liked the idea that you should never be the smartest person in the room… and it’s safe to say University of Cambridge delivers that.”

What is your current research project?

“I’m developing a rapid test that can help guide brain tumour removal during surgery, helping the surgeon tell where tumour ends and healthy brain begins, while they’re actually operating. Rather than waiting years for a brand-new treatment to reach patients, we’re focusing on optimising what’s already the gold-standard first step for most gliomas: maximal safe tumour removal during surgery. This matters because some tumours, especially low-grade gliomas, can spread beyond what the surgeon can see, and even with current neuroimaging and adjacent tools, you still can’t reliably see the true boundary in theatre. The goal is to support maximal safe removal: improving outcomes while protecting things like memory, speech, and quality of life for as long as possible.”

What do you hope to discover during your time here?

“I want to figure out what actually works in theatre, not just what works in a controlled lab setting. For me, success is developing something that surgeons would want to use because it’s fast, dependable, and fits the reality of surgery.”

Have there been any challenges in your current research you’ve had to overcome?

“Honestly, the biggest challenge has been the logistics, especially in the early stages. It’s a translational project, so there’s a lot of groundwork in bridging the academic with the clinical: getting the set-up right, coordinating across different teams and timelines, and constantly balancing what would be perfect scientifically with what’s realistic clinically. But I’ve also come to see that as part of the point. It’s forced me to stay focused on what will actually be usable in practice, and it’s made me appreciate how collaborative good science really is. A PhD needs more than scientific prowess, you need strong communication, you need to collaborate across different teams, and being able to advocate for your research can really make all the difference.”

How do you hope your research may help patients in future?

“My research focuses on improving surgical diagnostics and methods in brain tumour surgery, basically, giving surgeons better information to work with while they’re operating. It sits right at that decision point in surgery: do you take more, or do you stop? I’m trying to make the “where do I stop?” part of brain tumour surgery clearer. What inspired me is simple: the more tumour you can safely remove, the better outcomes tend to be. But with low-grade gliomas, the frustrating part is that boundary isn’t visible, and this “invisible” edge is exactly what I’m trying to tackle. My medical device experience also shaped how I think about impact. It’s not enough for something to work in the lab, it has to work in real clinical life, with real time pressure and real constraints. I want to support surgeons with a clear signal that helps with that judgement call in the moment. If we can make that decision even slightly clearer, that matters for patients.”

What excites you about the future of neuroscience?

“Neuroscience is becoming much more measurable, and that’s making it more actionable too. We’re not stuck with broad snapshots anymore, we can look at circuits and how neurons map together, and we can also zoom right down to individual cells and their microenvironments. The exciting part is that we’re starting to turn that into things we can actually act on and implement for clinical use. That can sound a bit abstract, but you can see it in brain tumour surgery strategy at the moment with 5-ALA: a compound patients take before surgery that can make some higher-grade tumours glow under a specific light, higher-grade basically means more aggressive / faster-growing. It helps surgeons see tumour tissue more clearly during the operation. And the fact it’s much less helpful for many lower-grade tumours is exactly why there’s still such a need for better tools, and that’s the gap I’m hoping to help close.”

What is life like in Cambridge as a PhD student researcher?

“It’s intense, but in a good way. There are so many seminars, talks, and student events that you can be spoilt for choice, and sometimes you have to remind yourself you can’t be in five places at once. What stands out most is how Cambridge-wide it feels. It’s not just your lab, you can sit down for a formal and end up having a great conversation with someone you’ve never met about how your work overlaps. I’ve never experienced a community quite like it.”

Do you have any words of encouragement for other researchers looking to do a Neuroscience PhD in Cambridge?

“I may be biased, but setbacks and mistakes make better researchers. Most people don’t have a perfectly straight path to a PhD, I certainly didn’t, and you don’t need one to belong here. If you care about the work, stay curious, and keep showing up (even when you’re unsure), you’ll surprise yourself with what you can do.”