Abstract: Evaluating automatic detection of incompatibility between male mice for timely intervention using TrackPaw. A collaboration between TrackPaw and AstraZeneca. 1: Animal Science and Technology, Clinical Pharmacology and Safety Sciences, Biopharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden 2: TrackPaw Scientific AB, Lund, Sweden Group housed male mice can develop aggressive behaviour as social hierarchies form. When dominance and submission do not stabilise, fighting may escalate, compromising both animal welfare and data quality. Currently, incompatibility is identified through daytime manual checks, which may detect issues only after overt signs, such as visible fighting wounds have appeared. Because this method does not provide continuous monitoring during the mice's peak activity periods, aggressive altercations can be missed between inspections, increasing the risk of preventable harm. To find means for more predictive and targeted interventions, TrackPaw Scientific AB, in collaboration with AstraZeneca, is developing an automated home cage monitoring platform for group housed male mice. TrackPaw is a weight sensor and RFID based system that replaces the standard cage in the rack and continuously tracks weight and movement of microchipped mice. Using these data, the system detects high intensity events (HIE) indicative of ongoing aggressive behaviour and alerts users when predefined thresholds are exceeded. To assess how HIE alerts can be used for practical colony management, 30 C57/Bl6 male mice (4 weeks old) were monitored in groups of three over 56 days using TrackPaw. Building on a previous study of 21 C57 male mice, where camera surveillance served as ground truth and false alarms were rare, this study aimed to define an alert threshold that would enable separation prior to incompatibility activities reaching their peak and before visible damage occurs. An optimal threshold of HIE was set at 180 seconds of detected activity within each 24-hour window (6 PM to 6 PM), and TrackPaw alerts enabled timely, targeted interventions in the relevant cages. The next step is to identify how climbing ties into the story, how RFID could be used to identify potential aggressors, and to compare similar baseline measurements for females of the same age, to streamline the process of separation and improve animal welfare.

Powering pharmaceutical innovation: Morton Electric delivers scalable solar infrastructure for AstraZeneca. Brad Morton - June 16, 2026 Delivering resilient, future-ready electrical infrastructure to support clean energy adoption in high-demand pharmaceutical operations. Morton Electric recently completed a comprehensive design-build electrical infrastructure project for AstraZeneca, enabling the integration of a 2.2 MW solar array at the company's facility. Interconnected at the plant's 12.47 kV substation, the system represents a strategic investment in both energy reliability and long-term sustainability. The project scope included installation of a 4 MVA transformer, new switchgear, panelboards, and a premium Square D I-Line distribution panel. This infrastructure ensures seamless integration of solar generation into the facility's existing electrical system while maintaining the high-performance standards required for pharmaceutical operations. Just as importantly, the system was engineered with future expansion in mind. The electrical design includes built-in capacity for a potential 1 MW battery energy storage system. As energy storage adoption continues to grow - driven by grid resiliency needs and declining battery costs - this forward-looking approach positions AstraZeneca to enhance operational continuity and manage energy more strategically in the years ahead. Across the pharmaceutical sector, energy demands are both intensive and non-negotiable. Advanced manufacturing, climate-controlled environments, and continuous research operations require highly reliable power infrastructure. According to industry analyses, life sciences facilities can consume up to 10-20 times more energy per square foot than traditional commercial buildings, making efficiency and resilience critical priorities. AstraZeneca, a global, science-led biopharmaceutical company, operates at the forefront of innovation in oncology, rare diseases, and biopharmaceuticals. As outlined in its 2026 reporting, the company continues to invest in sustainable operations as part of its broader commitment to reducing carbon emissions and improving environmental performance. Projects like this solar interconnection directly support those goals by reducing reliance on grid-supplied electricity and enabling cleaner energy sourcing. By combining robust electrical engineering with scalable renewable integration, Morton Electric's work demonstrates how infrastructure upgrades can support both operational excellence and sustainability targets. As more industrial and life sciences facilities look to balance reliability with decarbonization, projects like this offer a practical blueprint for the future of energy in high-demand environments.

Sustainable pharma packaging starts with asking better questions. Cambridge Design Partnership were delighted to see AstraZeneca and Deloitte nominated for an MCA Award for their work on sustainable pharmaceutical packaging. Cambridge Design Partnership supported the project through its materials science and manufacturing teams. It is a strong example of what Cambridge Design Partnership see with large pharmaceutical clients: sustainable packaging is a product development challenge, not a side issue about greener materials. The project focused on moving towards fully recyclable blister packaging. Three requirements shaped the work: recyclability, barrier performance and ease of manufacture, all in a regulated market where drug performance and patient safety matter. That combination shows why pharmaceutical packaging forces Cambridge Design Partnership to ask better questions. A greener material can still be the wrong answer. The narrow question is, "Can we make this pack recyclable?" The better question is, "What has to be true for a more sustainable pack to work in the real world?" That moves clients from material preference to product evidence. A material cannot be judged by its specification alone, or by whether it is recyclable, bio-based, fiber-based or lower carbon. It has to protect the medicine, run on packaging lines, survive transport and storage, meet regulatory expectations, support credible claims and work in the waste and recycling systems where it is sold. Sustainable pharma packaging is not a material swap. It is a system design challenge. Supplier data is not product evidence. The narrow question is, "Is this material more sustainable?" The better question is, "Will this material still protect the medicine after we process it, seal it, pack it and ship it?" A supplier may present a laminate, film, coating or fiber-based structure with strong barrier data, valid and given in good faith. But it usually describes the material under laboratory test conditions, not after forming, sealing, printing, sterilization, filling, transit and storage. Once a material enters a commercial process, barrier performance can fall, seals can become inconsistent, moisture protection can become marginal, and machinability can create scrap. The supplier is describing the material. The development team has to prove the pack. That moves thinking from material preference to product evidence. A material cannot be judged by its specification alone, or by whether it is recyclable, bio-based, fiber-based or lower carbon. It has to protect the medicine, run on packaging lines, survive transport and storage, meet regulatory expectations, support credible claims and work in the waste and recycling systems where it is sold. Sustainable pharma packaging is not a material swap. It is a system design challenge. The current pack may be over-specified. Patient safety is not negotiable. But that does not mean the current pack should always be copied. The narrow question is, "Can the new pack match the existing pack?" The better question is, "What pack performance does this medicine actually need?" With over 25 years working with leading pharmaceutical companies, you soon learn that packs are often based on specifications set years ago. Some requirements are essential. Others may reflect old material choices, equipment limits, qualification decisions or requirements that have not been reviewed for a long time. There is also a practical reason legacy formats stay in place. Changing a pharmaceutical pack can create cost, project risk and, in some cases, the need for regulatory approval or updated filings. That risk is real. But it is also why the requirement needs to be clear before change is ruled in or out. That does not mean organizations should lower standards. It means defining the real requirement: barrier performance, shelf life, safety margins, sterility and sustainability all needs to be considered and understood. Not every sustainability opportunity is worth pursuing. In many of its projects, the useful starting point is not one problem material. It is the portfolio. The narrow question is, "Which material should we replace?" The better question is, "Which change is worth pursuing?" Which formats create the most material burden? Which markets create the greatest regulatory exposure? Which SKUs use more packaging than the protection need justifies? Which changes affect validation or line performance? Which products should be left alone because the benefit is too small or the risk is too high? That portfolio view matters because the cost of change is real. Packaging lines are optimized, validated and expensive to alter. Changing equipment, requalifying a process or updating a specification can take months if notyears and require major investment. A material that cannot run at line speed is not a solution. A pack that improves end-of-life performance but creates stability or validation risk is not a solution. Recyclable in theory is not enough. The narrow question is, "Is this pack recyclable?" The better question is, "Will this pack actually be collected, sorted and recycled in the market where it is sold?" For global brands, a pack may be recyclable in one country, misunderstood in another and incinerated in a third. It may need separation steps patients will not perform, or use coatings, adhesives, inks, labels or mixed components that reduce the value of the recovered stream. It may be too small, contaminated, complex or unfamiliar for the sorting system. Designing for end-of-life means working backwards from real infrastructure: patient behavior, local collection, sorting, recycler tolerance and the actual route in each market. If that chain breaks, the intended environmental benefit may never appear. Waiting for regulation is already too late. The EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation is moving packaging towards clearer requirements for recyclability, labeling, waste management and evidence. Healthcare and contact-sensitive packaging has specific treatment because patient protection matters. But that should not be read as permission to wait. Pharmaceutical packaging changes can take years. If a change affects barrier properties, stability, sterility, line performance or regulatory filings, the timescale expands quickly. The narrow question is, "What does regulation require next year?" The better question is, "What packaging choices are we making now that will still be in market when regulation, infrastructure and procurement expectations have moved on?" Leadership starts with the better question. It's great to see this its Astra Zeneca and Deloitte collaboration project recognized with a nomination but it is equally important to recognize that the best consultancy projects begin with the client challenge. Real progress starts when companies identify the challenges that need solving and ask the right questions. AstraZeneca has consistently done that on sustainability, creating the impetus for work like this and driving the search for practical solutions. This work on blister packs is just one element of AstraZeneca's wider sustainability program. The company has set a goal of 50% waste circularity by 2030 and is already applying circular thinking across the business: from liquid helium reuse to silica waste reduction and its Turbuhaler take-back scheme in Sweden. That is leadership in pharmaceutical sustainability. At the heart of CDP's approach: how to turn sustainability ambition into real products. Connect with CDP. For more on how to accelerate meaningful innovation in sustainable pharmaceutical packaging, contact Cambridge Design Partnership.