Which institutions and investigators are leading Neurocept clinical trials and where are they being conducted?

1. What the supplied reporting actually covers — not Neurocept trials

The documents you provided include items about neurotherapeutics conferences and training (ASENT course and Grand Rounds) and broader clinical-trial landscape coverage — for instance, Rethinking Clinical Trials announcing a Grand Rounds session (Nov 21, 2025) and Massachusetts General Hospital describing its Neurotherapeutics program — but none of these items list Neurocept trial investigators or sites ^{[2] [4] [3]}. A newswire piece profiles a product named Neurocept as a consumer brain-support supplement, but that release reads like marketing and does not describe registered clinical trials, lead investigators, or participating institutions ^[1].

2. The promotional Neurocept item: product messaging, not trial data

GlobeNewswire’s item presents Neurocept as a new brain-support supplement with marketing claims about “clinically inspired development” and market positioning; it does not reference clinicaltrials.gov entries, trial protocols, principal investigators, or trial sites ^[1]. Based on the supplied excerpt, this is a product launch/PR piece rather than a report of investigator-led clinical research ^[1].

3. Where clinical-trial leadership and sites are normally found (context for your query)

When seeking who runs a drug or device trial, standard sources are trial registries and institutional pages: clinicaltrials.gov records list sponsor, principal investigators and study locations; academic centers (for example, Mass General’s Neurotherapeutics pages) list trials they conduct and their investigators ^{[3] [5]}. The Alzheimer’s pipeline review notes that trials are required to be registered and that reviewers annotate trial registry fields — underscoring that registries are the authoritative place to find site and investigator details ^[5].

4. What the supplied materials do say about the broader trial environment

The Washington Post item in your set describes how NIH funding cuts have terminated grants for 383 clinical trials, affecting tens of thousands of participants, which is relevant background for anyone tracking neurotherapeutics studies because funding and site continuity are vulnerable to such disruptions ^[6]. NIH and NINDS guidance pages in your collection highlight that NIH/NINDS both conduct and support neurological trials and that trial registration and diverse enrollment are priorities ^{[7] [8]}.

5. How to verify institutions and investigators — practical next steps

Because the supplied sources do not list Neurocept trial leaders or sites, the next step is to consult primary trial registries and institutional trial pages: search clinicaltrials.gov for "Neurocept" or the investigational product name; check press releases and SEC/clinical development pages of the company behind Neurocept; and review trial listings on major academic centers’ neurotherapeutics pages (Mass General’s NCRI is an example) and in peer-reviewed databases that annotate trial fields ^{[3] [5]}. The supplied materials note these are standard, authoritative places for such information ^{[5] [3]}.

6. Limits of this analysis and possible reasons for the gap

Available sources in your dataset either do not address Neurocept clinical trials or are promotional and lack registry details ^[1]. It is possible that: (a) Neurocept has no registered clinical trials; (b) trials exist but under a different investigational name; or (c) trials are recent and not covered by the provided items. The supplied NIH and Alzheimer’s pipeline sources emphasize reliance on registries for verification, but those registries were not included in your results ^{[5] [7]}.

7. Balanced takeaway for readers and next reporting steps

From the materials you gave me, there is no documented list of institutions or principal investigators running "Neurocept" clinical trials ^{[1] [3]}. For authoritative answers, check clinicaltrials.gov and institutional trial pages, and seek primary-source documents (trial registry entries, IND filings, or peer-reviewed protocols). If you provide registry identifiers or expanded search results, I can analyze those entries and identify lead institutions and investigators with source citations.