University of Bath

SYDNEY--(BUSINESS WIRE)--AdvanCell, a clinical-stage radiopharmaceutical company developing innovative cancer therapeutics, today announced $18M in Australian Federal Government Funding from the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Frontiers Initiative for ‘Defeating Prostate Cancer with Targeted Alpha Therapy’. One out of eight men develops prostate cancer. With the support from the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Frontiers Initiative, the goal of the multidisciplinary multi-institutional investigator team is to transform the clinical management of prostate cancer by leveraging leading therapeutic radiopharmaceutical technology paired innovative clinical development and a deep understanding of tumour biology to improve the lives of patients with prostate cancer. The research program is enabled by AdvanCell’s proprietary (Lead-212) 212Pb alpha isotope production technology along with the delivery of a first-in-field clinical platform trial to accelerate the translation of 212Pb-based targeted alpha therapies, one of the most exciting breakthroughs in cancer treatment. Dr. Anna Karmann MD PhD, AdvanCell Chief Medical Officer said: "On behalf of all Co-Investigators, I would like to thank the Australian Government and MRFF Frontiers Initiative committee for this prestigious award. Targeted alpha therapies are among the most promising in oncology. We believe this MRFF-funded research can be practice changing and have a lasting positive impact on the lives of patients with prostate cancer. We highly value the support and opportunity this funding provides to fast-track translation and accelerate the development of novel combination therapies in an industry-academic partnership." AdvanCell is collaborating with world-leading experts in Australia and globally, underpinning the transformative nature of the important clinical research. The clinical PIs include internationally renowned physician scientists Prof. Louise Emmett (St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney and University of New South Wales) and Prof. Shahneen Sandhu (Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne). Prof. Louise Emmett: "This collaborative Frontiers grant gives us the tools to deeply evaluate optimal combinations with targeted alpha therapy in prostate cancer – aiming for longer better lives using great technology in a smart way." Prof. Shahneen Sandhu: "Our MRFF grant will accelerate the development of innovative targeted alpha therapy combinations designed to enhance patient care and clinical outcomes." Scientific investigators include Prof. Richard Payne (The University of Sydney), Prof. Matt Trau, Dr. Alain Wuethrich, Dr. Kevin Koo (The University of Queensland), Dr. Scott Lovell (University of Bath), A/Prof. Serigne Lo (Melanoma Institute Australia) and Dr. Thomas Kryza and Dr. Simon Puttick (AdvanCell). Prof. Stephen Rose, Head of Translational Medicine and Clinical Science at AdvanCell, highlighted the importance of the MRFF funding. "The MRFF funding supports Australian innovation to drive the establishment of sovereign manufacturing capabilities to accelerate clinical translation of 212Pb-targeted alpha therapy." About AdvanCell AdvanCell is dedicated to developing innovative cancer therapies that harness the power of targeted alpha-emitting radionuclides. By combining advanced manufacturing capabilities with cutting-edge science and clinical development capabilities, AdvanCell aims to deliver novel treatments that improve outcomes for cancer patients globally. For more information, visit www.advancell.com.au.

THURSDAY, March 6, 2025 -- Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can overestimate glycemic responses, according to a study published online Feb. 26 in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition . Katie M. Hutchins, from the University of Bath in the United Kingdom, and colleagues examined glycemic responses to different test foods/beverages using CGM versus capillary sampling among 15 healthy female and male participants (nine and six, respectively). Participants completed seven laboratory visits in a randomized crossover design with washout of ≥48 hours between visits. At each visit, participants consumed an oral carbohydrate challenge composed of either 50 g glucose or equivalent carbohydrate as a whole-fruit, blended-fruit, or commercial fruit smoothie. The researchers found that compared with capillary estimates, CGM-estimated fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations were 0.9±0.6 and 0.9±0.5 mmol/L higher, respectively. There was variation in CGM bias by postprandial test, with the glycemic index for commercial fruit smoothie higher with CGM than capillary (69 versus 53). There was variation by participant in the differences in CGM versus capillary fasting glucose concentrations. Time >7.8 mmol/L was overestimated by about fourfold with CGM in unadjusted analyses; this overestimate was reduced to about twofold after adjustment for baseline differences. "These data demonstrate that a CGM can overestimate postprandial glycemia, and to differing degrees across foods/beverages," the authors write. "Therefore, if accurate quantification of postprandial glycemia is the primary aim, then capillary blood should be the preferred method and CGM may not be suitable, at least with respect to the CGM device tested in the present study." Several authors disclosed ties to the pharmaceutical, nutrition, and other industries; the data were supported by an unrestricted grant from Innocent Drinks. Abstract/Full Text Whatever your topic of interest, subscribe to our newsletters to get the best of Drugs.com in your inbox.

TUESDAY, March 4, 2025 -- Continuous blood glucose monitors have been promoted as potentially life-changing for people with diabetes -- allowing real-time updates on blood sugar levels without the need for repeated finger pricks. But a new small-scale study suggests these devices might not be as accurate as many believe, and could lead some to mismanage their diets. Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) appear to overestimate blood sugar levels in healthy adults, according to findings published recently in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition . The monitors consistently reported elevated blood sugar levels two to four times more often than finger prick tests, which are the gold standard for blood glucose testing, researchers report. “CGMs are fantastic tools for people with diabetes because even if a measurement isn’t perfectly accurate, it's still better than not having a measurement at all. However, for someone with good glucose control they can be misleading based on their current performance,” senior researcher Javier Gonzalez , a professor of health with the University of Bath in the U.K., said in a news release. “For healthy individuals, relying on CGMs could lead to unnecessary food restrictions or poor dietary choices,” he added. “If you want to assess your blood sugar accurately, traditional methods are still the way to go." Continuous glucose monitors were originally designed to help diabetics manage their blood sugar. However, the devices now are being used by health-conscious folks to help them track how different foods affect blood sugar levels, researchers said in background notes. The monitors track blood sugar levels via a patch slapped onto a person’s arm, and transmit the data to a smartphone, smart watch or other wearable device. For the study, researchers tracked blood sugar levels in 15 healthy volunteers after they drank or ate various fruit-based products, ranging from whole fruit to fruit smoothies. CGMs overestimated the glycemic index hit from a fruit smoothie by 30%, reporting a medium GI of 69 compared to the low GI of 53 shown in a finger prick test, results show. Whole fruits also tended to be misclassified as medium- or high-GI foods by the monitors, while finger prick testing showed they were low GI. This could lead people to avoid whole fruits, in the mistaken belief that they might cause spikes in blood sugar, researchers said. Overall, monitors overestimated people’s time spent above healthy blood sugar levels by nearly 400%, results show. Even after adjusting for other factors, the monitors still overestimated time above healthy blood sugar levels by about two-fold, researchers said. "CGMs may be inaccurate because they measure glucose in the fluid surrounding your cells, not directly in your blood,” Gonzalez concluded. “This can lead to discrepancies due to factors like time delays, blood flow, and how glucose moves between different parts of the body.” The research was funded by innocent drinks , a U.K.-based maker of smoothies. Whatever your topic of interest, subscribe to our newsletters to get the best of Drugs.com in your inbox.