AstraZeneca to buy Belgian cell therapy firm EsoBiotec for up to $1bn
British drug major AstraZeneca said on Monday it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire EsoBiotec, a Belgianbiotech company, for up to $1 billion on a cash and debt-free basis. The consideration includes an initial payment of $425 million on deal closing, and up to $575 million in contingent consideration based on development and regulatory milestones.
The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2025. EsoBiotec will become a wholly owned subsidiary of AstraZeneca, with operations in Belgium. AstraZeneca said the acquisition does not impact its financial guidance for 2025.
EsoBiotec will help AstraZeneca expand its cell-therepy portfolio.
This acquisition includes EsoBiotec's ENaBL platform, which empowers the immune system to attack cancers.
Susan Galbraith, executive vice president of AstraZeneca, said: "We are excited about the acquisition of EsoBiotec and the opportunity to rapidly advance their promising in vivo platform. We believe it has the potential to transform cell therapy and will enable us to scale these innovative treatments so that many more patients around the world can access them."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
6 hours ago
- Observer
Rebuild aid consensus
In 2015, the United Kingdom's then-prime minister, David Cameron, stood before the United Nations General Assembly and challenged other donor countries to follow the UK's lead and back the newly-minted Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for eradicating poverty with their aid money. 'We haven't just achieved the UN's 0.7 per cent [aid-to-GNI spending] target, we've enshrined it in law,' he declared. That was then. As heir to an extraordinary bipartisan consensus forged under the post-1997 Labour government, Cameron's Conservative government had established Britain as the most generous aid donor in the G7, and one of just four countries to meet the 0.7 per cent aid target. Now, a Labour government has torn up the remnants of that consensus, joined a global attack on aid, and set a course that will leave the UK among the world's least generous countries. The fact that a UK government led by the Labour Party, with its long tradition of internationalism and solidarity, has all but abandoned its leadership role on an issue encoded in its DNA illustrates the political forces shaping a new world order, notably US President Donald Trump's view of international cooperation as a zero-sum game played by losers. But it also challenges development advocates in the UK to focus on strategies aimed at minimising harm and rebuilding the case for aid. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the decision to cut foreign aid and channel the savings to an expanded defence budget ahead of a meeting with Trump. The aid budget is set to fall from 0.5 per cent to 0.3 per cent of Gross Nation Income – the lowest level since the late 1990s. After removing the roughly one-quarter of the official development assistance spent on refugees in the UK, Britain will slip from ninth to 22nd in a ranking of countries' Overseas Development Assistance as a share of GNI. While there has been opposition to the aid cuts, a new consensus has taken root. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch applauded the decision to convert ODA into defence spending. The far-right Reform UK party's election manifesto called for the aid budget to be halved. When Jenny Chapman, Britain's development minister, delivered ODA's death warrant, she told a parliamentary committee in May that 'the days of viewing the UK government as a global charity are over.' Some two-thirds of Britons, including most Labour supporters, support increased defence spending at the expense of overseas aid. The UK is hardly alone. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which accounted for more than 40 per cent of all humanitarian aid in 2024, has been dismantled. In Germany, the world's second-largest donor, Chancellor Friedrich Merz's new government will reduce an already-diminished aid budget. France is set to slash ODA by 40 per cent, while the recently collapsed right-wing government in the Netherlands, a longstanding member of the 0.7 per cent club, has decreased aid spending by more than two-thirds. The human toll of the cuts is already starting to emerge. The demolition of USAID has left acutely malnourished children without food, HIV/AIDS patients without antiretroviral drugs, and clinics unable to treat deadly diseases like childhood malaria. According to a recent study, Trump's suspension of aid could result in 14 million additional deaths, including 4.5 million children under five, by 2030. Cuts by the UK and other donors will inevitably add to these human costs. An already chronically under-financed humanitarian aid system now confronting famine threats and food emergencies from Sudan to Gaza and the Sahel has been pushed to the brink of collapse: less than 10 per cent of the 2025 UN appeal is funded. The political currents fuelling the attack on aid vary across countries. In the US, nihilistic anti-multilateralism has been a driving force. In Europe, fiscal pressures have interacted with right-wing populist narratives linking aid to migration, pressure on public services, waste, and corruption. Starmer now cites Russian security threats to justify deeper cuts. So, what can be done to rebuild an aid consensus? The first priority is to minimise harm. Maintaining the UK's £1.9 billion ($2.6 billion) commitment to the World Bank's International Development Association is critical because every dollar contributed can leverage $3-4 of financial support for the poorest countries. The UK could also make the most of a shrinking aid budget by channelling more humanitarian aid through local actors, rather than bureaucratic UN agencies. Still, tough choices must be made. There is a strong argument to protect spending on life-saving programmes, such as child nutrition, vaccinations, and HIV/AIDS, and for minimising cuts in areas where the UK is a global frontrunner, like girls' education and social protection. Even with a diminished aid budget, the UK could exercise greater leadership. With debt-service costs now crowding out spending on essential services in many low-income countries, Starmer's government could demand comprehensive debt relief at this month's UN International Conference on Financing for Development. Ultimately though, the case for aid must be fought and won in a public square increasingly dominated by right-wing populists. Political leaders in the UK and across the West need to communicate the hard truth that global challenges like climate change, war, and poverty require international cooperation. And they need to tap into the deep reservoirs of generosity, solidarity, and moral concern that define public sentiment even in the midst of our troubled times. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2025. Kevin Watkins The author, a former CEO of Save the Children UK, is a visiting professor at the Firoz Lalji Institute for Africa at the London School of Economics.
Observer
12 hours ago
- Observer
UK to boost 'homegrown talent' in new AI skills drive
LONDON: UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday pledged to boost "homegrown talent for the AI age" by teaming up with tech giants to train 7.5 million workers in artificial intelligence skills. Speaking at the start of London's Tech Week, with a line-up of speakers including Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, Starmer said: "In this global race, we can be an AI maker and not an AI taker." Starmer was due to have a one-on-one conversation with the chief of the star Silicon Valley semiconductor firm whose chips are critical for artificial intelligence applications and research. Ahead of the event bringing together industry giants, Starmer announced a government-industry partnership to train 7.5 million workers in AI skills, including in using chatbots and large language models to boost productivity. Tech firms including Nvidia, Google, Microsoft and Amazon committed to make training materials freely available to businesses over the next five years. Google EMEA region President Debbie Weinstein called it a "crucial initiative" essential for developing AI skills, unlocking AI-powered growth "and cementing the UK's position as an AI leader". In his opening speech, Starmer said Britain must build "the digital infrastructure that we need to make sure AI improves our public services". The UK has a "responsibility" to "harness this unprecedented opportunity and to use it to improve the lives of working people", Starmer added. "We are going to build more homes, more labs, more data centres, and we're going to do it much, much more quickly." His government has pledged to fire up the UK's flagging economy, including with "pro-growth" AI regulations to attract tech investment and turn Britain into an "AI superpower". "We are putting the power of AI into the hands of the next generation -- so they can shape the future, not be shaped by it," Starmer said in a press release before the event. The British leader unveiled £187 million ($253 million) in funding to help develop tech abilities including training for one million secondary school students, as part of its "TechFirst" programme. He called it a "step change in how we train homegrown talent for the AI age". The investment will "embed AI right through our education system", he said, announcing nearly £150 million in undergraduate and PhD research scholarships in AI and tech. Starmer also announced a "commitment from Nvidia to partner on a new AI talent pipeline", including through expanding a Nvidia lab in Bristol, southwest England. The UK's AI sector is valued at £72 billion, employing over 64,000 people, and is projected to exceed £800 billion by 2035. It was growing 30 times faster than the rest of the economy, according to government figures from 2023 — an "incredible" rate, according to Starmer. Other speakers at the tech conference include the CEO of Mistral AI, Arthur Mensch, the UK's Science Secretary Peter Kyle and Markus Villig, founder of ride-hailing app Bolt. — AFP
Observer
a day ago
- Observer
Immigration only helps the economy if strictly controlled
Immigration has been an issue for a number of years in the UK and it, inevitably, played a major role in the referendum for Brexit in 2016. Regardless of whether immigration involves an EU state or elsewhere, it remains an important issue with the government. It was of no surprise that the Prime Minister, Kier Starmer, unveiled last month, as widely reported, sweeping reforms to the UK's immigration system in a bid to curb levels of net migration. Starmer laid out a series of measures that will make it harder to move to the UK and obtain citizenship. The UK government's proposals to prioritise highly skilled immigration are understandable – the only question is whether they go far enough. Since the pandemic, the profile of immigration patterns has shifted sharply towards low-skilled migration, while the number of visas granted to dependents has risen sharply. This includes over 300,000 granted to dependents of those on the health and social care route alone between 2021 and 2023. The number of international students has also soared, driven by one-year masters courses at low-ranked universities. UK visas for universities globally ranked between 601 and 1,200 increased by 49 per cent between 2021 and 2023, while visas for those ranked in the top 100 fell by seven per cent. And far from paying their fees, studying and then departing, in the year to June 2023, 46 per cent had shifted to a non-study visa within one year, compared to just two per cent of those who arrived on such visas in 2019. While the Treasury may simplistically score migration as boosting growth, what matters is GDP per capita. Recent OBR analysis shows low-skilled immigrants are a fiscal burden throughout their lives – and this analysis does not account for the impact of dependents. The government's own figures show the average employment rate for adults arriving by the family route is only 64 per cent, with average earnings of £27,200. Mass immigration drives up house prices and, undoubtedly, puts more pressure on public services and social cohesion. It places downward pressure on wages, despite the fervent wishes of some, the labour market obeys the law of supply and demand. More insidiously, it reduces the incentives of employers to train up British workers., confident that they will instead be able to import a cheaper worker from overseas. The argument is – where immigration is permitted, it should be primarily short-term in nature, rather than long-term, which is why the extension of the qualification period to apply to stay in the country permanently is important. As announced, the tightening of English language requirements and the reimposition of a degree requirement for skilled workers are positive, as is the increase in Immigration Skills Charge. Closing social care visas to new overseas applicants could be significant, though the governments own analysis estimates that it will reduce net migration by only 7,000 a year. The new restriction on graduates are largely cosmetic and will do nothing to stop the scandal that only 30 per cent of surveyed graduate visa holders were working in professional level jobs after graduation. However, many of these changes will not come into effect until next year, and the details are too often vague or incomplete. How many occupations will be on the new Temporary Shortage List? How many refugees will be allowed to apply through the skilled worker route? Will the levy on international student income ever be implemented? The Home Office (Interior Ministry) stands alone against the vested interests and stakeholder lobbies of other government departments. Immigration can deliver economic gains – but only if it is tightly controlled and very strictly targeted on those who will be net contributors. Andy Jalil The writer is our foreign correspondent based in the UK
