logo
Canadian scientist wins Breakthrough Prize for discovery of hormone used in Ozempic, Mounjaro

Canadian scientist wins Breakthrough Prize for discovery of hormone used in Ozempic, Mounjaro

CBC07-04-2025
A Canadian researcher has won a 2025 Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences for discovering the GLP-1 hormone used in diabetes and obesity medications — including Ozempic, Wegovy and Mounjaro — that have changed the lives of millions of people around the world.
Dr. Daniel Drucker, an endocrinologist and a clinician-scientist at the University of Toronto and the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute at Sinai Health, shares the $3 million US prize with four colleagues from the United States and Denmark.
They were all involved in the development of the now-famous drugs manufactured by Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly. Drucker and three co-winners made discoveries about glucagon-like peptide-1 in their labs. The other recipient of the award, Lotte Bjerre Knudsen, who works for Novo Nordisk, led the way in developing it into medications.
The Breakthrough Prizes, often referred to as the "Oscars of Science," were handed out Saturday in Los An​geles for categories including fundamental physics and mathematics, in addition to life sciences.
The Breakthrough Foundation says the prizes were created to "celebrate the wonders of our scientific age." Another Canadian, Maaike van Kooten of National Research Council Canada, shared a $100,000 US prize called New Horizons in Physics with two international colleagues for work in optics to view exoplanets.
In an interview in the week prior to the event, Drucker said the prize is meaningful because it's awarded by other scientists and "gets a lot of attention in the scientific community."
"We have students and trainees and awards like this tell them that the world is watching and thinks the work is meritorious. And I think that's just great for morale and for young people," he said.
Drucker began his journey studying genetic sequencing of glucagon-like peptides at a lab in Boston in the 1980s, then returned to Canada and continued his work at the University of Toronto.
He spoke with The Canadian Press about those early days, what he thinks about how the resulting medications have changed the world's view of obesity and what other health issues GLP-1 might address in the future.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
When you started at that lab in Boston, why were you studying this particular hormone?
"There were probably about a dozen projects in the lab at that time. So some people were working on pituitary hormones. Some people were on basic cell biology projects. Other people were working on different genes and glucagon was one of the projects in the lab.... It just so happened when I got there, they said, 'OK Drucker, you work on the glucagon gene.' [It] could have been another gene [and] you never would have heard from me again.
Were there any key moments where you thought, 'Wow, this is a big deal?'
"I don't think there was any one 'Eureka!' moment, but I will say the potential importance dawned on me when I walked into the lab one day and my notebooks were gone. And I said, 'Oh my gosh, someone broke into the lab and stole my notebooks.' And then it turned out no — my supervisor [and a fellow prize winner], Joel Habener, took my notebooks because he was excited enough about the results to file a patent."
When did you come to the University of Toronto?
"I came back in 1987.... In 1996, when we and others discovered that GLP-1 inhibits food intake, that was in my lab in Toronto, and we've done experiments on heart disease and inflammation and kidney disease and liver disease. So I literally have been working on this for 40 years."
When did Novo Nordisk (manufacturer of Ozempic and Wegovy) become involved?
"I think the big companies, Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, and even other companies were trying from the beginning to develop medicines based on GLP-1. But we learned through some painful lessons that if you give too much GLP-1 too quickly, people throw up. It's still a side effect today, right? Some people just don't feel well and they have some nausea and vomiting. And so it took the pharmaceutical industry quite a while to figure out how to make GLP-1 last longer so it's not broken down, how to give small amounts to start off with, how to slowly build up the dose, et cetera. And that took years to do."
What are you working on now and what are some other applications for GLP-1 drugs?
"If we just look in the last couple of years, beyond lowering blood sugar and beyond reducing body weight, we have seen that these medicines reduce the rates of heart attacks and strokes and reduce the rates of diabetic kidney disease and are helpful for people with obstructive sleep apnea and reduce disability in people with arthritis and prevent the development of severe metabolic liver disease. And there are trials underway in Parkinson's disease, in Alzheimer's disease, in substance use disorders.
"So I kind of look at this and I go, 'Wow, how does that happen? What are the things that GLP-1 is doing in the brain or in the blood vessels or in the kidney to improve the health of these organs?' So we're really focused on this aspect of GLP-1, including how GLP-1 reduces inflammation, which we think is a major part of the benefits that GLP-1 brings to the table."
Are cardiovascular benefits because GLP-1 medication reduces weight or manages diabetes and that improves cardiovascular health?
"What we're starting to see is that in many of the trials, the benefits don't strictly correlate with weight loss or blood sugar control. So there's no question [that] getting your blood sugar normal if you have Type 2 diabetes, reducing your body weight if it's too high, that's helpful.
"But when we actually look at the trials and we see who has the benefit and who doesn't, there's not a perfect correlation with blood sugar control or weight loss. And so we think there are, you know, independent actions of GLP-1, perhaps through reduction of inflammation, that are also beneficial. And this is exactly what we try and study in the lab."
We're now seeing a culture shift in how we view obesity. What do you make of that?
"It's a very complex discussion. So let's say 10 years ago, we had a very understandable movement, which was 'healthy at any size.' Don't focus on your weight per se, focus on your health, which I still think is a very powerful message. And part of that messaging was because we didn't have solutions other than bariatric surgery to allow people to become healthier, perhaps at a lower body weight.... And in society, there tends to be a segment of our society that looks at people living with obesity and says, 'Well, you know, it's just willpower. If you really wanted to lose weight, you could, you're just not trying' or 'You're lazy,' or you know, 'You're weak.'
"And we know that many of these people that we see in clinical practice have been on very calorie-reduced diets and working out and doing everything that we asked them to do. But their brains are defending a higher body weight.... And now with the GLP-1 medicines, we see that... we can help people lose weight. And I think this is very powerful because the people who were struggling before who could not do it by themselves can now lose 10, 15, 20, 30, 50 pounds."
Do you have any trepidation or thoughts about these drugs being used by people who may not need them?
"Well, you're speaking to the person who worries about everything, so of course I have concerns... It's been a little bit like The Hunger Games. People have to phone six pharmacies and find one that had a month's worth of drugs and then drive as fast as they could to that drugstore to get them, which is not great. And so while that's happening, to see other people getting a prescription because Uncle Harry's wedding is coming up in two months and they just want to lose a little bit of weight so they can look a little more fit at Uncle Harry's wedding — you know, as a physician, I say, 'Wait a sec, this person living with heart disease and Type 2 diabetes needs these medicines to reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes. Maybe that should be a priority as a society over you looking a little better for Uncle Harry's wedding.' So that's been one dilemma.
"And then the other big challenge that we still have is these medicines are very expensive. In many jurisdictions, we don't have everyone with access to a drug plan. We don't [have] every drug plan agreeing to reimburse for the medicines.
"And finally... we don't have clinical trials on healthier people without diabetes, without a higher body weight that are studied [to know], 'Well, are there any particular side effects in this group of individuals?' They weren't studied in the clinical trials. Is there something we should be worried about, going on and off the drugs when you want to lose weight...is that healthy? We don't know. And so we have to always be mindful of what we don't know about the safety of these medicines."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

2 Undervalued Healthcare Stocks Poised to Dominate the Next Decade
2 Undervalued Healthcare Stocks Poised to Dominate the Next Decade

Globe and Mail

timean hour ago

  • Globe and Mail

2 Undervalued Healthcare Stocks Poised to Dominate the Next Decade

Key Points Pfizer and Novo Nordisk have underperformed the market over the past year. But both should remain major players in important areas within the pharma industry. Investors could see the two drugmakers' shares beat the market over the next decade. 10 stocks we like better than Pfizer › Pharmaceutical giants Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) and Novo Nordisk (NYSE: NVO) have lagged the market over the past year, although Pfizer's poor performance dates back much further. Though these companies have encountered challenges, there are good reasons to be bullish on their long-term prospects. Pfizer could become an even bigger player in the oncology market (the largest therapeutic area in the industry by sales) over the next decade, while Novo Nordisk will be a major player in diabetes and the fast-growing weight management space. Both could produce excellent results along the way. Here's the rundown. 1. Pfizer Pfizer's financial results haven't been great in recent years. To make matters worse, the company will face important patent cliffs by the end of the decade. One of them will be for Eliquis, an anticoagulant that is still one of its best-selling medicines. However, Pfizer has prepared for that eventuality. The company made several acquisitions and licensing deals that significantly boosted its pipeline, especially in oncology. Pfizer spent $43 billion to acquire Seagen, a smaller cancer specialist whose lineup and pipeline were impressive for a company of its size. With the financial and strategic backing of the larger company, it should yield even more key approvals in the field in the coming years. Pfizer also recently made an up-front payment of $1.25 billion to China-based 3SBio for the rights to SSGJ-707, an investigational bispecific antibody, a portion of the oncology market that's gaining traction these days. 3SBio will be eligible for commercial and regulatory milestone payments of up to $4.8 billion, not including royalties. These moves should eventually pay off for Pfizer and strengthen its position in oncology. The drugmaker plans to have eight blockbuster cancer medicines on the market by 2030, up from its current five, while doubling its reach from the current 1 million patients it serves. Of course, Pfizer isn't just a cancer play. The company's extensive pipeline should enable it to launch products in other areas and ultimately get back on track. While its shares have been lagging the market significantly, that could change in the next decade as financial results rebound thanks to its innovative efforts. Pfizer's shares look especially attractive when considering its valuation. Its forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio is 8.7, much lower than the healthcare sector 's 15.8. From their current levels, Pfizer's shares could go on to generate excellent returns through 2035. 2. Novo Nordisk Novo Nordisk pioneered the market for weight management medicines. However, Eli Lilly seems to have taken the lead in that field, at least for now. Novo Nordisk has faced some clinical setbacks, leading to a poor performance over the trailing-12-month period. Can the company rebound and perform well in the next decade? In my view, it can, and the market may be significantly undervaluing its potential. Its sales of Wegovy, one of the top-selling anti-obesity medications, continue to grow rapidly. Novo Nordisk recently requested approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for oral semaglutide (the active ingredient in Wegovy). That's good for patients who want a non-injected option, and helps counter Lilly's up-and-coming oral GLP-1 medicine, orforglipron. Elsewhere, Novo Nordisk recently started phase 3 studies for amycretin, a next-gen weight loss candidate. Amycretin is being investigated in both oral and subcutaneous formulations, and both are currently in late-stage clinical trials. The company also enhanced its pipeline through licensing deals, including one with United Biotechnology, a subsidiary of the China-based company United Laboratories International Holdings, for UBT251. This potential anti-obesity medicine mimics the actions of three gut hormones: GLP-1, GIP, and glucagon. The transaction cost Novo Nordisk an up-front payment of $200 million and up to $1.8 billion in milestone payments. Thanks to all these developments, Novo Nordisk should remain a leader in weight management in the next decade. Even though competition is mounting, no drugmaker not named Eli Lilly has a lineup or a pipeline as deep as Novo Nordisk's. Furthermore, the Denmark-based pharmaceutical leader will also continue to dominate the diabetes market, as it has done for decades. Novo Nordisk generates consistent revenue and earnings that typically grow faster than those of similarly-sized peers. Yet the stock's forward P/E is 16.7, which is slightly above the industry average. In my view, that's a bargain for a company that generates better-than-average results and has a deep pipeline in a fast-growing area -- not to mention two of the world's top 20 best-selling drugs, in Wegovy and Ozempic. For investors willing to stay the course, Novo Nordisk's future still looks incredibly bright. Should you invest $1,000 in Pfizer right now? Before you buy stock in Pfizer, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Pfizer wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $652,133!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,056,790!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,048% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 180% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 15, 2025

Health advocates urge Carney to respect pledge for UN Global Fund fighting AIDS, TB
Health advocates urge Carney to respect pledge for UN Global Fund fighting AIDS, TB

National Observer

time2 hours ago

  • National Observer

Health advocates urge Carney to respect pledge for UN Global Fund fighting AIDS, TB

AIDS activists are urging the federal government to quickly renew Canada's support for fighting infectious diseases abroad, warning delays will further hinder global efforts to combat key illnesses. "While some of the other nations around the world are retreating right now from investing in global health, Canada can and should be stepping forward swiftly, to save lives," said Justin McAuley, a director with the Canadian branch of the ONE Campaign. His group is among 24 Canadian civil society organizations that asked the government to allocate $1.37 billion over three years for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. The fund is affiliated with the United Nations, and it supports developing countries in limiting and treating the three preventable illnesses, which in many regions are among the leading causes of death. Canada is one of the world's top supporters of the fund, which makes up the largest chunk of Ottawa's global health spending. Canada has contributed nearly $5 billion to the Global Fund since 2002, and the fund estimates it has saved 65 million lives in that time. Countries replenish the fund every three years, with their contributions usually rising over time as health-care systems build more capacity to treat and prevent these diseases. In each cycle, civil society groups issue what they call a fair-share metric to reflect how much each wealthy country can reasonably pledge to help the fund reach its goals. The office of Randeep Sarai, secretary of state for international development, referred questions about the $1.37 billion request to Global Affairs Canada. "Canada looks forward to working together as part of the Global Fund partnership to secure a successful eighth replenishment of the fund this year," the department wrote in a statement. "Discussions regarding Canada's pledge are ongoing." McAuley said he hopes Ottawa announces its pledge soon, to build momentum for other countries to follow suit. "Canada has a unique role and legacy to play in the global health space," he said. "Our momentum will mean something on the world stage — if we come out early, and don't wait for the last minute." Results Canada, another group asking Ottawa to meet the civil society target, noted the G7 summit that Canada hosted in Alberta "focused on trade, conflict and climate — but overlooked two of the most powerful tools for global stability: health and education." That has put the legacy of the Global Fund "under threat," the group argued in an email campaign. "As countries cut international assistance, decades of hard-won gains hang in the balance." UNAIDS reported on July 10 that HIV infections and deaths continue to drop, but sudden cuts by the United States and others "threaten to reverse years of progress in the response to HIV." US Republicans recently reversed plans to cut PEPFAR, the world's largest HIV program, but Washington is still on track to slash its contribution to the Global Fund. Countries normally make pledges at an organized conference, such as the last cycle when prime minister Justin Trudeau visited the United Nations in New York in 2022. This year, there is no pledging conference, though McAuley expects leaders of large economies to make pledges before visiting South Africa for the G20 summit in November. He said global health is already under pressure from armed conflicts, climate-related events and the ongoing recovery of health systems from cutbacks during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rich countries are cutting back on foreign aid as they increase military spending. Prime Minister Mark Carney promised in last spring's election to not cut foreign aid spending or development financing, though this was before he launched a review of government spending and committed to large amounts of military-related spending. McAuley said Carney ought to meet the metric outlined by civil society, or he'll be offside with his two last predecessors. "Both Harper and Trudeau repeatedly stepped up and did Canada's fair share," he said. "Is Carney going to break that pattern now and step back?"

Wildfire, tornado researchers search for answers in Jasper's charred forest
Wildfire, tornado researchers search for answers in Jasper's charred forest

National Observer

time2 hours ago

  • National Observer

Wildfire, tornado researchers search for answers in Jasper's charred forest

Lori Daniels and a team of researchers plan to let a hand-held GPS guide them in a few weeks to more than 100 spots in the charred forest around Jasper, Alta. At each location, they'll plunge a stake into the ground and take notes. Are there needles left on the trees? The branches? How far up is the tree charred? Are roots exposed? In fewer words, they'll be asking: how bad was the fire? Daniels, who has been back to Jasper several times since last summer's destructive fire, says she has partly observed the answer to that question. "I've seen a lot of devastating fires across British Columbia in the last decade. I've spent a lot of time in burnt forest," said Daniels, a professor and co-director at the University of British Columbia's Centre for Wildfire Coexistence. "And I have to say, there are parts of the Jasper fire that were absolutely shocking." It has been nearly a year since wind-whipped wildfires burned a third of Jasper's structures to the ground. Outside the town's limits, what happened in the nearly 330 square kilometres of singed forest has interested researchers. They want to know whether more than 20 years of forest management affected the fire's behaviour as it barrelled toward the townsite — and whether there was a fire tornado during the blaze. Parks Canada had done extensive work to thin the overgrown forest surrounding the town during that two-decade period, said Daniels, who had several research plots in the area years before the fire. She said she believes much of Jasper is still standing because of Parks Canada's efforts, including prescribed burns and trimming trees. Canadian forest agencies are still trying to figure out the best ways to treat their forests so that a wildfire can be slowed down before it reaches a community, Daniels said. The upcoming research could help Parks Canada and provincial wildfire agencies figure out whether treated parts of the forest helped firefighters protect neighbourhoods. "(It's) a really critical question. The treatments cost thousands of dollars per hectare, tens of thousands in some environments," she said. Insured damages from the fire have been estimated at about $880 million. Parks Canada is supporting Daniels' research. It's also undertaking a "series of investigations and reviews related to the fire," it said in a June statement. Laura Chasmer, an assistant professor at the University of Lethbridge, had 34 research plots in Jasper before last summer, 19 of which were burned in the fire. She and a group of students are continuing previous research on the type of fuels that build up in forests and can make wildfires more vicious. Part of that research has sought to understand how peatlands and trees killed by pine beetle can contribute to the spread of wildfire. "Climate change is changing forests in ways that we really don't understand," Chasmer said. One of Chasmer's students will be joining Daniels this month when the research begins around Jasper. "It was really hard for us to go back there," Chasmer said of Jasper, where she has conducted field research since 2021. "But I think that we can learn so much from this fire." Whether there was a tornado during the fire has also intrigued researchers from around the country. Mike Flannigan, research chair at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, BC, has publicly suspected a fire-induced tornado happened during the Jasper blaze. "It sure sounds and looks like it was a tornado," he said. Researchers from Western University's Northern Tornadoes Project in London, Ont., are trying to confirm precisely what happened in the Jasper inferno. Aaron Lawrence Jaffe said there are suspicions of the rare phenomenon. Huge swaths of thousands of trees were uprooted or snapped, said the engineering researcher for the project. And debris, including a shipping container, several heavy-duty metal garbage bins and heavy campfire pits, were flung hundreds of metres from their original spots. "It was unlike any wind-damage survey I've done before," Jaffe said. "There's evidence that there was some kind of vortex." The kind of damage witnessed could have only been created by winds of about 180 kilometres per hour, he said. His team also took drone photos and videos of the damage to help find potential patterns that could have been caused by a twister. However, he said, fire tornadoes are a nascent field of research as very few have been recorded worldwide. The lack of radar coverage in Jasper is also a complicating factor for researchers, making it difficult to determine whether there was a tornado. They're also awaiting data from federal researchers, which would help determine if there was fire-induced weather that could generate a tornado. Jaffe said he hopes his lab will have an official answer in the coming months.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store