Someone left a comment earlier today asking if I knew any more information about the C8 Medisensors non-invasive CGM, which was given CE mark approval late last year. Some of you may remember me getting quite excited about it after having seen the device in action.
At that stage, the general expectation seemed to be a European launch in the Spring of this year. In January I got wind that the launch had been put back slightly to allow for 'further enhancements' to be made prior to the launch in mid-2013.
I've had a little look around the internet, but all I can find are reports/stories from late last year. Trying to look up the C8 folks I met via LinkedIn suggests that they stopped working for the company in January this year. It seems that at about the same time John Kaiser took over reins at the company - so what happened then?
With an increasing sense of doom, I realised that their website seems to have gone offline in the past few months too.
To be honest, I'm gutted.
Just wondering if anyone knows what the story is? I really believe that their non-invasive CGM, if it lived up to the promise shown, genuinely had the ability to completely change the landscape of diabetes care across Europe, and CGM pricing/availability in particular. £2000 for 4 years, rather than £3000-£4000 every year would put self-funded CGM within the grasp of many more people in the UK. A currently frustrated and untapped market.
I can't have been the only one waiting for lauch with one hand reaching for my wallet.
Anyone from C8 Medisensors out there?
Thanks for writing about this Mike - I hope they are just regrouping and not bought out by those who might like to keep costs up. M C Somers
ReplyDeleteI really hope so!
ReplyDeleteI had written an Mail to Lutz Heinemann from AGDT and asked him about this Topic, because the AGDT had written an opinion about this product.
ReplyDelete(http://diabetes-technologie.de/download/stellungnahme-c8-agdt-2012-02-17.pdf)
He said the Company got into financial difficulties. Because of this, there will be no market launch.
I think, there will never be an non invasive Technology at the Market, as long as someone is making Money with test stripes and such stuff.
Thats just Mafia
Not sure many of our readers' German is up to muster for that link, but thanks for the comment!
ReplyDeleteI would have bought one. The cost would have worked out at £10 per week. The NHS (NICE) may well have considered supplying them on prescription as its the equivalent cost of using 20 test strips. Let's hope this isn't the end of the story.
ReplyDeleteIt seems hard to believe that they have realy finished all their money. They have been hiriging untill recently.
ReplyDeleteDo we know if their technology is for sale?
If not than I guess that one of the big ones has bought them and shut them down.
For a long time I was hoping that it had just 'gone quiet' while they did a little tweaking and resolved some pre-production issues.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately though, as the weeks roll by and we are getting less information, rather than an explanation of what is happening (particularly with their website going offline) I am beginning to fear the worst.
I still clinging to a shred of hope that a launch date and/or some explanation might emerge, but I'm nothing like as optimistic as I was :(
So what I feared has become true (again) :-(. Initially we get seduced by fancy web pages, enthusiatic stories, we even can "pre-register". But in the end it's all an HOAX! Money rules!!!
ReplyDeleteOver the years I've seen several (mainly US-based) companies claiming that will provide a non-invasive meter "next year", but they either stopped, disapeared into thin air or were sold out. I've lost hope and can concur with a previous comment: It must be Mafia: CEOs (founders) are bought out, company busted! Tnx Guys, on behalf of milions of Diabetics!
Indeed this is amazing. The company had a CE certification. It has raised money a few times. It was raising workers until almost a month ago and now it disappears ????
ReplyDeleteDon't we have any political power?
I mean if this was a medicine for cancer, would it just disappear???
This company had promise but all of sudden they went down. They where just paying a lot of labor wages and not being able to pay for the manufacturing of the product. Sad story.
ReplyDeleteI don't know... I found a blog dated May last week that still talked about it as an ongoing project/company, though suggested that the device was unlikely to be released for year(s).
ReplyDeleteAs far as I know there has been no 'official' announcement. I'm not one for conspiracy theories. As far as I'm concerned 'no news' is usually 'no news'. Would be nice to know for sure though.
I'm a former employee at so mentioned C8 Medisensors and the Company has indeed gone under. Our facility is closed and I doubt it will ever reopen. It was heart breaking since I believed in the product we were developing hoping it could change lives of the Diabetics in my Family.
ReplyDeleteI believe the real reason that the company went under is not because some big guys (Abbott,J&J,Bayer etc.) bought them out (no one did) but rather that the technology was never quite good enough. If you look at the published data that C8 shared, it was a very marginal product. Non-invasive glucose detection is a very difficult problem to solve and unfortunately for patients it is far easier to raise money than technically solve the problem.
ReplyDeleteSad, but when I saw http://www.groveinstruments.com/ I realized they might be eventually outclassed. Regardless, the industry for noninvasive is moving forward.
ReplyDeleteThat's odd. I'm not sure what trial data you are referring to... The confidential data we were shown *DID* appear to show comparable Clarke Error Grid accuracy to conventional CGM. The most recent trial I can find online (June 2012) doesn't seem to have published yet... http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01726114
ReplyDeleteHopefully someone buys their IP and reboots it... I would still use strips but it would be a nice complementary device to use for sports, driving, things like that
ReplyDeleteYou would need to use strips anyway - the C8 Medisensors device is a CGM for continuous 'trend' information and would need calibrating/checking with standard fingerstick before making any treatment decisions.
ReplyDeleteRead the Jan Lipson paper in JDST (2009). Clarke A zone is 53% and A+B is 92% which is not quite up to current CGM standards (Keenan JDST 2010) of 73% A and 97% A+B. More importantly is the tracking and current CGMS seems much better in that regard based on the limited published C8 data at meetings and in the refereed literature
ReplyDeleteWell yes... I did skim through the Lipson paper a while back, but that's from 2009 and quite a long way back in the development process. A lot of R&D water passed under the bridge since then. I'd be far more interested in the (unpublished) 2012 study and did glimpse some confidential 'prelaunch' data in 2012 that looked far more promising, but we weren't allowed to keep a copy of those slides/graphs.
ReplyDeleteIn any event and for whatever reason it doesn't look like we'll be getting hold of this particular non-invasive technology any time soon :(
as I understand it, these guys are doing something similar...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cybiocare.com/home
This is another former C8 employee here to say that the company is indeed gone and has been for most of this year. It was not a graceful exit. They still owe many employees wages. The labor department for state of California has received complaints about this nonpayment but they will not pursue legal action because they view the company as insolvent.
ReplyDeleteLike many of you, I also hope that this technology is picked up by another company. The technology was very exciting but the upper management was incompetent.
That is so disappointing... :( As a type 1 who can't use invasive cgm or pumps I really need something like this. I hope someone else will buy their technology and keep working on this.
ReplyDeleteI was a former employee at c8, we all got furloughed since Feb this year.
ReplyDeleteAs type 1 diabetic I am like many, desperate to get hold of a continuous non invasive monitor. There is a definite market out there if the price is right and it would make such a difference to the quality of life of all diabetics. Does anyone have any more information on the viability of this product, particularly those of you who worked for the company ?? I would do all I could to help raise funds to continue the development of this monitor if it was really a viable CGM. Surely there are others like me who would do the same ???
ReplyDeleteI am so sorry that this company appears to have failed when it was so close to acheiving it's aims.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if GE Healthcare might be able to take the technology forward - they invested significantly in C8 Medisensors only 18 months ago.
I'm a Type 1 and was very excited about the prospect of the optical sensor too - my wife persuaded me to try the Dexcom system instead of waiting. I wasn't keen on the idea of wearing a sensor at first but it is so small that you really don't notice it at all.
The Dexcom G4 is incredibly consistent and reliable. The sensors are about £60 each in the UK but you don't have to pay VAT on them, and most that I have used have lasted longer than the licensed 7 day session. They are absolutely invaluable for day to day control, exercise, getting the basal insulin right etc.
I'm sure that for well motivated Type 1s these CGMs are the way forward and will easily be shown to be cost effective in terms of reducing the costs of complications from hypos and hospital care in later years. They definitely enable the possibility of near normal BGs with few if any hypos.
I think it will be a few years before the data is there for NICE to be able to do a technology assessment that endorses their routine use in the NHS, so in the mean time we will have to self pay in the UK. There's no better investment than one's future health though.
Our diabetic units in the UK will have little experience in the routine use of CGMs for uncomplicated diabetics but there's lots of support from the companies and online - some authors advocate that Type 1s group together to buy the hardware and share it (not the sensors of course).
I gather that the next gen Dexcom G5 will use a smartphone as the reciever so it should be even cheaper.
Very best wishes, and thank you for the great blog.
Maybe the technology is not dead? Read to the end.
ReplyDeletehttp://9to5mac.com/2013/07/18/apple-stacks-iwatch-team-with-sensor-fitness-experts/
You beat me to it! I was going to post the link. Seems like they hired some guys from Senseonics too. I've been following the C8s for a while now, excited when they got CE approval, devastated when they went under shortly under. I don't think the apple watch will have glucose sensing though, they don't want a medical device, they want something that'll appeal to the masses. :(
ReplyDeleteI wonder ...
ReplyDeleteI think Apple will do it.
Steve Jobs will almost certainly have needed insulin after his pancreas surgery, and it would be a wonderful legacy for him if they can make it work.
Probably more revolutionary than the invention of the pulse oximeter.
I worked at C8 MediSensors and was "furloughed" in January. From what I understand (and there was no official announcement) they ran out of money after they realized that the monitor needed to be re-engineered. Speaking to one of the engineers, I was told that it definitely can work, it just needed more refining, but the refining would take another 6 months to a year and another $10-20 million. Too bad. Great company to work for and had high hopes for the future. Somebody else will eventually end up with the IP and finish it, but it may take some more years... legal, financial issues.
ReplyDeleteIf the technology is viable, why have none of the other already-established CGM companies like Dexcom picked up on it?
ReplyDeleteWell... the cynical conspiracy theorist might suggest that the existing technology players would very much hope that a non-invasive solution *never* comes out. If one does... and it is properly viable... and *even* if it is their own... then you switch from a medical-insurance-driven model of £5000 a year to £500-£600 a year (the C8 device was going to be good for 4 years and retail at around £2000). The (non-medical insurance based) UK does not seem to be a market that CGM manufacturers are particularly interested in. It seems they are content to keep the market small and the prices high.
ReplyDeleteI think it is only a matter of time before a non-invasive (sensor free) device launches and C8 came pretty close I think. And when it does... it will quite rightly shake things up a bit.
The G4 receiver was £700 last year, transmitter £275 - this has been running continuously for more than a year now - battery level still OK.
ReplyDeleteThe sensors are about £60 each, but work well for two to three weeks - there is a potential infection risk but I haven't had any problems at all with them. Some people on the web have left them in for longer but I wouldn't advise that.
So it has cost about £6 per day over the first year, and I would expect to spend less next year (about £4.50 a day) as I already have the receiver, but will need a fresh transmitter at some point. This is less than the cost of a pack of cigarettes a day ....
Most of us could afford this if we prioritised it.
Wonderful inside info from the staff at C8 - very many thanks.
We may yet see an iCGM at the Apple WWDC in a year or two!
The device never worked, it is a scientific boloney. It is a very hard problem to solve to start with and the way C8 was doing would never get there. Everyone was out of job by end of January, while John Kaiser died from a hockey accident in January also. Many people had 3-5 months unpaid wages. Too bad they get so many people on a false hope and no one even have a decency to make an official announcement
ReplyDeleteBack in October 2011, I received a great job offer and accepted, unfortunitly on the eve of my start date, a family member ended up in the ER, I postponed my start date, a few weeks, upper management desided to pull my job offer.
ReplyDeleteI was still in contact with many of C8's employees since, little by little, emails & folks disolved, now I know, as I thought, C8 fizzeled.
Oh well.
Mike D.
San Jose, CA
That trial NCT01726114 has now completed. But no results published. Anyone know a back door to see results from ClinicalTrials.gov ?
ReplyDeletehttp://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01726114
How much support would there be for a Kickstarter campaign to raise cash for a reboot of the technology, avoiding the patents that C8 holds?
Lots and lots of comments on this blog. I just kinda wish so many of you weren't posting as 'anonymous'. It just makes me suspicious - sorry about that!
ReplyDeleteOne of the lenders to C8 is Venture Lending & Leasing VI, Inc. Venture made a series of term loans to C8 in 2011 and 2012. The loans total $5,000,000 and are cross collateralized. A number of vendors have filed liens against C8 in California and Pennsylvania courts, but they are subordinate to Venture's secured interests. C8 has ceased operations and terminated all employees. Its rented building is vacant. The company has no receivables and no cash in its bank. Venture is foreclosing on its collateral. The venture capital investors, including GE Healthcare and an investor from Dubai, have abandoned their investments.
ReplyDeleteC8 pursued me for a job. I have quite a bit of experience in getting diagnostics FDA approved and it was very obvious to me from the get go that they were in over their head. They worried about device precision and accuracy, they never even started to address biological variability. I know right away that they were doomed. Contrary to many statements here, I don't any company will be dumb enough to pick this up. Raman spectroscopy is the wrong technology, the SNR is way too low.
ReplyDeleteWell... just because something is difficult doesn't mean it can't be done. And any diagnostic device company that *isn't* worried about precision and accuracy is of no interest to me. The device seems to have gone through a number of stages of development from filing-cabinet-sized 'proof of concept' down to something approaching a wearable solution. Having seen it being worn, and providing results it is clear that it did work, at least for some people. C8 were quite clear that it wasn't for everyone, and that for some people it just didn't seem to work - but then again I could say that about most of the insulin analogues out there to be honest.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if the technology is viable with a little more tweaking or fell at the final hurdle because of something more fundemental, but having got so close it seems a little unfair to suggest (once again anonymously) that there was never any hope of it working from the outset and they may as well have just poured all those $ millions down the drain.
I was a former C8 employee, working on the actual FW of the device. Their concept was interesting, but in the end, the device was a victim of of the medical audit process. This was about the least intrusive medical device one could think of, and the audit process just made it difficult for a startup like C8 to ship product.
ReplyDeleteManagement's own stubborn reliance to stick with an antiquated technology platform that made no sense to run as a computational device. I proposed a way to use an mobile phone's own resources to compute the glucose measurement, but it fell on deaf ears.
Plus, the overall research was a bit flawed. The device was too sensitive to light, so it had to be shrouded in darkness. The patient also had to smear some kind of gel to improve the optical transmission properties of the CGM.
I think the device would have had better chance at working in an industrial or in a veterinarian setting.
if apple gets into this biz i will buy a frickin iphone and ditch my android. that would do it. how awesome is this? they have to do something with the billions they pay no taxes on
ReplyDeleteI am a medical device engineer who had some experience in developing non invasive glucose meter. Optical method has its limitation as Charles mentioned. We worked for 7 years and had prototypes, and did clinical trial. However, it is still can not meet regulatory requirement. The business model and reimbursement issue are also barrier for startups.
ReplyDeleteHere I want some assistance from you, in July some Taiwan pharmeutical company demoed a non invasive glucose meter, which is from Germany and had clinical trial in Korea. We would like to know more about its technology, but I serached lots of website and papers but found nothing. Is there anyone who can give me some hint? Thanks for your assistance in advance.
You can find some photos from links below
http://taiwan-reports.com/news/?c=articles&a=show&id=973
http://www.healthnews.com.tw/readnews.php?id=10422
http://twup.org/?id=09sgjse3a59l
Hi-ho, hi-ho, its off to Apple we go...
ReplyDeleteThe company has been dismantled. As you speculated, in late January everyone was asked to clean out their office. The monitor itself had some significant issues that would not allow it to go to market without considerable issues and risk to users. Last minute venture capital did not come through as speculated.
ReplyDeleteA few factions have continued the charge to realize the non-invasive approach (no formal commitment has been made). It is not without many barriers and difficulties. I trust one day we will finally have it available but with a C8 Medisensors marking... no.
The folks there were incredible and passionate about the solution and I hope they continue to battle the barriers to success.
-a passionate ex-C8 employee
There are others, Lein Applied Diagnostics may be worth keeping an eye on (Excuse the pun)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lein-ad.com/diabetes_care.html
Can any ex-C8 employee to answer a simple question: did the non-invasive sensor work, ie if you can use whatever you need to use (display, microprocessor, transducer...), can you measure blood glucose level sufficiently accurate by only touching human skin? If the answer is "yes" with convincing data, can you leave your email? Sorry for being an anonymous and thank you all for the information/discussion.
ReplyDeleteFirst off ,thank you, for the ex employies telling us what has happened as a T1 no news is worse than bad news!
ReplyDeleteSecondly it sounds like it was just a case of financial problems but the technology works, maybe not as good as blood monitoring but getting closer.
Thirdly, why dosent some country step in? I mean if the NHS funded research there would never be a closure on loans because it is a govenment body. They would be the users of the devices anyway,so they could pay for the research,use patients to test it as its non invasive,then manufacturer and ofer it for sale to those who could afford to buy and free to those who couldnt and as there would be millions made costs would become little and they could sell worldwide gaining a income to fund more research....I am just sick of hearing about new fantastic devices that never make it to production just because of financial hiccups because its businesses that are making these devices and not govenments, why do we insist on using middle men instead of doing it directly?
I remember back when apple had a keynote presentation that let Life-scan the makers of One-touch present a testing add on for the iPhone. I think it was iPhone 2 may have been 3. I was so excited. I waited and waited nothing happened. I sent emails to Life-scan and even called a couple of times. They just seemed to blow me off. They gave it not thought and did not really address the issue. It seemed they wanted to pretend it never happened. I was a One-touch user since it came out years ago and that left such a bad feeling with me that I left them and tried other meters. I now use a Bayer Contour. I do love apple and all their products. I hope they get involved, hire their own people and develop all kinds of medical devices. Once again changing the world.
ReplyDeleteI read this today:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.mdtmag.com/news/2013/10/measuring-blood-sugar-light
Based on this?
In vivo noninvasive monitoring of glucose concentration in human epidermis by mid-infrared pulsed photoacoustic spectroscopy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23214424
Very interesting Anon. Another one to watch perhaps?
ReplyDeleteEver wondered how startups run by people who have no experience can create great products while others fail? I've wondered about that as well... but that's not what this (my) post is about... You hire a bunch of top-heavy people, you will run out of money... $54M gone... anyway.
ReplyDeleteYou can read as much as you want into this... "On Monday (11/25) were headed to MIT to discuss the tech around the raman spectroscopy, MIT has done more work on this and can licenses what we need to take the raman spectroscopy into wearable tech; and end up launching something similar to what they were trying to launch"
All depends on how much it costs to license and who is willing to play... $54M with nothing out is a sad sad story.
While most grownups are trying to make big bucks with our malaises, take a look at what a bunch of high school kids in Mexico City are doing, they worked a mid-term project with a homemade spectrophotometer to gauge glucose concentrations in blood.
ReplyDeleteThe video unfortunately is in spanish, but it should give you an idea, see below the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3VjrvPugQM
Would not be incredible to start a kickstarter project???
I will post further info as I progress my research on these kids
Cheers
To answer anonymous from Sep, 15. The sensor did not work terribly well. Read the Jan Lipsom papers and you see an A range of 50% or so. You can measure some people some of the time. This is a wicked hard problem that has not been solved yet. The $54M is only a very small part of the total expenditures on non-invasive sensing (estimated at more than $600 M over the last 10 - 15 years).
ReplyDeleteI was a C8 employee(Data Analysis Engineer) with 12 years in noninvasive including 1 year at C8(the last year). I actually saw all the data and made calibration models and tested them. The device was capable of CGM accuracy by mid 2012, but the research wasn't finished with regard to the measurement robustness. In any endeavor this difficult you need to know why you fail when you do, so you can address it. Early CGMs had these kind of issues with sensors "going to sleep". Lots of progress was made at C8 in 2012 as large amounts of clinical data were taken, more data was collected in the first 4 months than in the entire history of the company. But prior to 2012, the device didn't work, the data were very limited and the results were probably intended to raise money and we all know what that means. When I arrived in late 2011 the data were poor and were not tested with big glucose movement(>100mg/dL). The advertising was way ahead of the capabilities of the device. People high up in the company and even some senior engineers thought it was "almost done", and GE was apparently fooled as well by limited data and the small elegant size. In 2012, major progress was made, some amazing data was collected and predictions showed a great promise. But research into measurement failures ceased and R and D was locked down as the drive towards CE mark froze progress and management failed to listen to unaddressed issues. After a 4 months of this I decided to leave. The technology is very promising, but the company was seriously top heavy in management and had a ton of manufacturing employees on payroll(80?) which just burned through the money at an alarming rate. I left in late 2012 knowing that failure to address the robustness issues would bring it all down and I told them so in my exit interview. It would be great if someone will pick it up and run with it, but I would hope the management and senior technical personnel would be more experienced in the noninvasive arena next time. Money should not be a problem if Apple or Google were to pick it up, heck google spent 3Billion on an intelligent thermometer, 5x the amount spent by all noninvasive researchers in the history of noninvasive glucose..
ReplyDeleteI participated in the C8 tests. I went to their lab 4 times for about 4 hours each and once wore the sensor for an entire day while at work. During tests in the lab the subjects sat in a chair the whole
ReplyDeletetime in order to minimize body movement. This was especially important during the 45-60 minute
calibration period at the beginning of each test. The tests typically went through lunch. At times we
were asked to drink a couple of bottles of Ensure in order to get our blood sugars to rise. We were not
shown the output of the sensors during tests in the lab.
The device was about the size of pack of cigarettes. You had to wear a wide elastic band
around your abdomen which was fastened in the back with Velcro. The elastic band had
a rectangular plastic ring exposing your skin. The sensor snapped into this ring. Prior to
inserting it, they had to place a dab of gel onto the device's optical window and then very
carefully smooth it out in order to make a even contact with the skin. Apparently the evenness
of the gel was critical. After attaching the device for the all-day test, they attached a lycra
cover over the device which attached to the elastic band and covered the device. This
cover was a pain in the butt because it kept slipping off (maybe this is why the accuracy
was bad). Overall the whole thing felt pretty bulky.
The all-day test consisted of fitting the device in the morning and then wearing it until
early evening. In this test I was able to see the results using an android phone. The
results were way off. It would never have been usable for me. I had to reset the device
in the middle of the day and re-calibrate. I don't remember the numbers but prior to
the reset it was off at least 100-150 points.
I think the technology definitely had some promise but it definitely was not ready for prime time.
Another issue was that it very expensive in USD and their early plans did not include approval
for US use. That meant that insurance companies would not pay for it. It was cool technology
but how many people are able to shell out $4000-$5000 out of their own pocket for it?
Non-invasive CGM is a great concept but it's hard to compete against products like the
Dexcom which are cheaper, more accurate and are covered by insurance.
Cannot find confirmation of a 77 yo John Kaiser dead of a hockey accident; still listed as CEO of Crdentia Corp (not a typo).
ReplyDeletePity it seems to have stopped, it was the next step - non-invasive and ability to link to smartphone cheaper all round for every health economy.
ReplyDeleteIt would be interesting for an investigative journalist/tv company to look at it and see if it was just bad luck/mis-management financially or whether it was many other innovators who frightened the competition in to getting the finances pulled to stop their lucrative incomes
I just wanted to share this article with you:
ReplyDeletehttp://9to5mac.com/2014/02/07/from-fashion-to-fitness-the-experts-behind-apples-wearable-future/
Once I read the section regarding Ueyn Block, I searched for C8 MediSensors and found this blog. While I'm not diabetic and have no person interest in non-invasive glucose measuring the technology just interested me and I had to learn more about it. It seems like a lot of people would benefit from this - hopefully Apple can actually change at least some peoples worlds by bringing this to fruition.
Steve T.
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/healbe-gobe-the-only-way-to-automatically-measure-calorie-intake
ReplyDeleteHmmmm.... well... Call me Mr Cynical, but I'm afraid using a 'unique algorithm' with measurements of impedance "measures fluid levels in tissue", pressure "blood flow and heart rate" and an accelerometer doesn't sound like it will calculate the "amount of glucose in cells" with the kind of accuracy and reliability required for medical management. To be honest it doesn't sound like it would be able to make anything but the vaguest guess about calorie intake either. How will it tell a lettuce leaf from a lump of cheese with that information?
ReplyDeleteI'll wait clinical trial data thanks, but chipping into crowdsourcing? I don't think so. Sorry!
Okay, it's been a month since the last post; we need to keep the discussion going. Pardon the expression, but having diabetes *sucks*, worldwide.
ReplyDeleteThanks to the 6 Nov. 2013 post above, (mid-infrared pulsed photoacoustic spectroscopy), I now know that "QCL" in that context means "quantum cascade laser." It's way too technical for me, but I'll keep reading up on it.
Has anyone else looked into the GlucoTrack® from Integrity Applications (Israel)? Instead of any optical technology, it's based on "ultrasonic, electromagnetic and thermal technologies," according to their site. . The sensor is clipped onto an earlobe. I don't know as that's something I'd want to wear contantly, especially while working, but I'll bet it could be optimized to require the user to take periodic readings to "prove they're alright" and not hypoglycemic. If the user didn't report a normal reading within a certain time frame, then the notifications, GPS tracking, etc. would start.
Mike K, thanks for bringing this information "to light." Thanks to the former C8 employees, too.
Healbe was a scam:
ReplyDeletehttp://pando.com/2014/04/16/as-healbes-1-1m-indiegogo-scampaign-closes-what-now-for-fraudulent-crowdfunding/
Healbe being a scam is entirely unsurprising. A real shame that some people were taken in though.
ReplyDeleteIf c8 medisensors shut down mid 2013, how come patents were still being published late 2013?http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20130301046 & http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20130266258
ReplyDeleteBecause GE wanted the patents and still holds them today
DeleteBecause GE still holds the right to the patents
DeleteNo idea. Would that be part of the 'winding up' of a company - registering patents that might become useful later on to attempt to claw back a tiny part of the R&D expense at some point in the future?
ReplyDelete"Integrity Applications (Israel)" is -- in all likelihood -- just a scam company...it trades under the symbol"IGAP" on NASDAQ...I looked at their SEC filings and they have only around a million bucks in cash -- hardly enough to develop and/or market a product...no partners or even anyone who appears might be interested in partnering...there are at least a half dozen Israeli companies trading that, like this one, appear to be nothing hot air and snake oil...I even wonder whether they chose the name "integrity applications" as some sort of joke on investors...
ReplyDeleteI received an email fromn C8 medisensors just yesterday stating they are still working on a few small issues to perfect the device (this has delayed things) but there are high hopes for all to be sorted by the end of summer - so we'll keep hoping
ReplyDeleteBest regards
Jayne
Jayne - I would be quite cautious about any such email. From what I can tell, not much of the company that was C8 Medisensors still exists - this article on MIT Technology Review gives a pretty thorough account of what went on: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/529026/blood-sugar-crash/
ReplyDeleteI'm not quite sure what the private equity group that picked up the pieces will be able to do, or when - but I'm not exactly holding my breath any more.
Looking for a non-invasive diabetes management sensor company to partner with for a commercial launch with one of the largest, world renowned hospitals in the U.S.
ReplyDeleteSeveral people who posted here as anonymous, I would like to have you reach out to me - you are former C8 employees.
4dhealthware.com is the company. Use the contact us link.
Thanks!
We are an early stage company developing a non-invasive glucose monitor, please do not assume that companies that are attempting this are hoaxes, it is a very difficult thing to achieve and whilst I'm sure that there are some hoax companies out there, there are also a number of teams working round the clock to develop something accurate enough that can be brought to market. Thanks to all for contributing to this thread, it is very insightful
ReplyDeleteI was one of the test subjects in what was the last big round of testing. They were getting things set up and I was very aggressive with my eves dropping. My study was march 2012
ReplyDeleteThey were obviously a mismanaged, disorganized mess. Hearing they folded was the least surprising news. They hadn't warned me that they would ask me to drink sugar and not correct my blood sugar so it would be really high and having spent an hour on a train to get there and a needed paycheck involved it was a lame position to suddenly have to screw up my blood sugar or figure out a new way to pay rent. The staff was unaccustomed to dealing with ethical situations and were not exemplary humans, especially my main contact, a secretary who knew shockingly little about diabetes.
That upsetting detail aside, the people in management seemed over excited and the technical people less so. There was an ongoing problem that people would get burned by the contraption that was a concern. One of the head guys expressed concern at the accuracy and, as indicated above, some people were convinced it was technically on it's way and others were deeply sceptical. They had a lot of interesting knowledge of what strips Re most and least accurate, freestyle are proven the best, fyi.
As stated the thing was giant, involved covering your body with gel and heated up to so much that burns were a concern at that point. I was not allowed to knit as any motion disturbed the contact.
I know less than others on this point but my general impression was that in march 2012 there was still major inaccuracy issues to overcome and they were discussing the funding concerns pretty openly.
They were typical silicon valley at its worst, disorganized, over paid, arrogant and ultimately
If the data indicated at all that 15 million would have really gotten that thing to market they would have gotten that funding so easily.
ReplyDeleteAs a former data analysis engineer who was intimately familiar with the data, I can say the technology was quite capable but not finished. I left late 2012 when I saw that investors and management insisted on terminating research and going into "manufacturing mode" when it certainly wasn't finished. Financial pressures from VC's on the board probably made this happen. this is what happens when you fund raise and make promises to VC's without enough data to validate a delivery schedule. This is one device that can never be shipped before it is finished, and the inexperience of management in the diabetes arena didnt help. John Kaiser knew it couldnt be shipped without further development, and he stopped shipment(2 months after I left) as I understand it. It was a case of too many yes men in management either ignorant or not having the courage to tell the truth or be critical enough to ensure the technology was finished. A "shoot the messenger" culture for those critical of the schedule helped to squash important critical feedback. Yes, glucose measurement over large controlled clinicals( over a hundred subject days used for CE mark) were a bit better than dexcoms CGM at that time, but there were still newly emerging failure modes and software was locked down due to CE mark application, hence failure mode detection was not possible in real time. When the instrument was taken to personal use(no assistance by techs, uncontrolled use) the data degraded substantially. When you go to inexperienced self use you find many more ways to do things wrong. The regression solutions definitively indicated direct measurement of glucose, remember the Raman spectrum is a "fingerprint" method for molecular identification, so its easy to prove what you are measuring. As I understand it, creditors(vendors) shut the place down when reality of the need for new research hit and funding became difficult after Kaiser died. The burn rate there was astonishing for a start up, clinicals were very expensive and 120+ employee salaries(including 20+ directors and above) will burn a lot of money, period. there is a lesson here in that not enough time elapsed between the first consistent glucose measurements in spring 2012 and the planned shipping date in fall 2012 to understand the failure modes and develop software detection of these in needed additional studies. Locking down development during(premature) CE mark application was a big factor in stunting progress. Consistent glucose measurement only was achieved in spring 2012. Earlier "fund raising" data were mostly cherry picking of data and not real generalized calibrations that could work on many individuals/instruments. the technology is still out there I understand, but funding is going to be a problem in this risk averse R&D atmosphere of established companies. Add to that the allure of noninvasive glucose is tarnished by a history of failures since the 90's, making VC investors very skittish.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know the name of the PE company that picked it up?
ReplyDeleteas the father or a T1D juvenile and an engineer myself, I am extremely interested in attempting to apply this technology for personal use. Would like to connect with any former C8 engineers to understand the challenges with this approach , please contact me at the website listed in my profile
ReplyDelete"optical" "photonic" "lasers"...
ReplyDeleteA poor candidate for NI-BG because the FDA requires bio-compatibility data, the wavelengths don't propagate into blood and require **very still and precise sensor-sample placement**.
Just Say Nope. The physical laws of the universe aren't bent by Venture Capital.
Alas - the quest continues...
I was a participant in the trials and when the founder died, we were never paid and the money "was buried with him". I was owed 4000 when they fizzled out...
ReplyDelete