Afon Technology Questionnaire

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SimonP

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 1
I just received a reminder to fill in a questionnaire from Afon Technology. They are a company who are seem to be developing a non-invasive blood glucose "watch type" device.

I don't know if it will actually work, etc., but the website looked half reasonable (https://afontechnology.com/) and they are not actually selling a product right now, which are both positives in my book. The proof will be in the pudding if and when the devices become available.

Anyway to cut a long story short, I thought it was interesting that the questionnaire asked amongst many other things, whether I'd be happy to do calibration finger prick tests (to which I answered yes, as I need to do those for the libre(2) anyway to ensure it provides accurate readings), and they also asked which payment structure would be preferable with the following options (they didn't give the totals):

£550 upfront (potentially over 3 months - a later question) plus £35/month for 24 months = £1390 total
£750 upfront (potentially over 3 months - a later question) plus £25/month for 24 months = £1350 total
£900 upfront (potentially over 3 months - a later question) plus £15/month for 24 months = £1260 total

I'm curious as to the 24 month lock-in, it appears to be non-intrusive so I presume this is either a subscription model or simply a way of spreading the total cost to make it easier to swallow.

Again to stress that I know nothing about the company nor whether the device is real/working/etc., but thought I'd share the pricing information at least.
 
SimonP said:
I'm curious as to the 24 month lock-in, it appears to be non-intrusive so I presume this is either a subscription model or simply a way of spreading the total cost to make it easier to swallow.
Click to expand...
Or it could be that something about it means it needs replacing once in a while. Might just be the battery, come to think of it?
 
I don't think it's the battery as the rotating images in the background of their main page claim a 14 day battery life and I can see both a charging port in the case and there's a dock from the looks of it (I think these may be different versions of the same thing though)

1698175971721.png

I suppose there may be something that wears out, though to have a rolling subscription model it assumes that said item wears out more often than the subscription duration. Who knows! 🙂
 

Attachments

  • 1698175918090.png
    1698175918090.png
    115.1 KB · Views: 0
Looking at those images a bit more, the blood glucose readings look rather smooth.....

1698176087639.png
 
SimonP said:
I don't think it's the battery as the rotating images in the background of their main page claim a 14 day battery life and I can see both a charging port in the case and there's a dock from the looks of it (I think these may be different versions of the same thing though)
Click to expand...
I was imagining a rechargeable battery that might need replacing (since they do wear out), but I think that would make more sense if the thing took more power (so it needed recharging a lot) and 14 days doesn't fit that. I guess it's probably to spread the cost over time.
 
It uses ultra low power RF/microwaves to measure blood glucose. I think this one works in conguction with a smart watch, expect an inlfux of these if they pass approval.
 
I’ve seen one too many of these recently. I’ll wait until I see some MARD data, and then wait a good bit longer for some real world experiences.

There’s been a recent spate of non-invasive (and useless) watch-based devices that have made me a bit cynical I’m afraid.
 
They currently looking at a MARD of around 10% with these devices, yes the recent watch based ones are fake. If these get passed approval then we are finally looking at some competition in the CGM market and hopefully more affordable monitoring for all diabetic sufferers.
 
Im also bit spectial about how watch can read your blood sugar without anything going inside it just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
 
pistolpete said:
It uses ultra low power RF/microwaves to measure blood glucose.
Click to expand...
How? What is it about RF/microwaves that is uniquely affected by the glucose level of blood?

Rather like @everydayupsanddowns, I think that they should focus on producing something that demonstrably works and is of use. Then worry about how to monetise it.

I note from their website that although there are plenty of fine words and marketing style pictures nothing is said about the performance of the unit that could be used to judge whether it would be of any value and have performance characteristics that could compare with current CGM units. There is reference a paper describing some trials. At first sight that paper appears to claim that the device can detect hyper or hypo glycaemia but it will take some unpicking to work out how they arrived at that conclusion. No raw data, lots of references to statistical methods and everything presented as percentages, the sort of report that is indicative of very early stages of development to my mind. I wish them well but I would would like to see a lot more before investing in the "product".

​

 
Last edited:
Docb said:
Rather like @everydayupsanddowns, I think that they should focus on producing something that demonstrably works and is of use.
Click to expand...
Agreed. If they want to sell something in 2024 I'd expect a paper (or preprint) showing that what they're doing can work.

But the FAQ doesn't seem to say anything about that. Instead, they give this paper (from May 2023, so fairly recent): https://afontechnology.com/2023/05/03/afon-technology-clinical-proof-of-concept-study/

But that seems to be listing average errors 22%-46%. It says "Furthermore, the ARD results are comparable to first models of commercially available minimally invasive products without the need to insert a needle." which I can believe but isn't that interesting, and "The prototype has been further developed and is being tested in subsequent studies." which I can also believe, but I'm not sure whether that means they're headed towards ARD of (say) 20% or better.

I'm not sure that 20% would be quite good enough. Wouldn't be great but maybe it would be good enough? I wonder if an HCL could have adequate performance with such a sensor?
 
Inaccurste results may be ok for the 'fitness' /zoe market, i suppose, but i'd prefer an inconvenient but accurate cgm to a noninvasive watch cgm.
2 devices both giving different live data is of no interest...
 
You see this might just be me(and I'm happy for others to disagree with) be but I find the term in invasive a little bit silly when it comes to discussing blood glucose monitoring. I wouldn't call what we use now invasive I wouldn't even call finger pricking practically invasive maybe inconvenient some times and not always easy to just stop and do but I think calling it invasive is a going a little bit too far.
 
Last edited:
Look how long it took to get the T-slim pump to the real world! I saw that very soon after I got my first pump and I'm on the third now, as they've all been Roche ones which only get replaced by my bit of the NHS every 5 years, and the second one had to be replaced after about 2 so we had to start counting again, I've completely lost track of how long I've been pumping.

Saw it at a Diabetes UK Big Day Out at the Arts Centre at Warwick University when I also got a free copy of the Carbs & Cals book from one of the authors (Chris someone) That very pleasant blonde lady whose name I can't remember was head honcho of DUK at that time - before Chris Askew.
 
Tdm said:
Inaccurste results may be ok for the 'fitness' /zoe market, i suppose, but i'd prefer an inconvenient but accurate cgm to a noninvasive watch cgm.
2 devices both giving different live data is of no interest...
Click to expand...
All tests are "inaccurate". The question is whether they're good enough to be useful or not.

And if you measure twice (particularly with different devices) you're likely to get different results. The question is just whether they're likely to be close enough for that not to matter too much.

(It's a bit like the aphorism "all models are wrong", and given that a number of CGMs seem to use statistical models maybe they fall exactly into that.)
 
Docb said:
How? What is it about RF/microwaves that is uniquely affected by the glucose level of blood?
Click to expand...
The RF/microwave causes a resonating field, the reflected transmission measures the capacitances, inductances and resistance of the fluid as more or less glucose is in the fluid these figures will change. I would imagine they will concentrate on the interstitial fluid rather than the blood.
Its not a new idea the problem is making the technology small enough and reliable along with usable results.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top