ɬ﷬

Student Spotlight: Yonatan Morocz, BBME PhD Candidate, was awarded at the ɬ﷬ Clinical Innovation Competition

Yonatan Morocz, alongside PhD supervisor David Juncker, was awarded the MI4 Innovation Prize at this year’s Clinical Innovation Competition, recognizing the successful translation of their research into a practical innovation with real-world impact.

Yonatan Morocz, BME PhD CandidateYonatan Moroczis in his final year of his PhD in theBiological and Biomedical Engineering (BBME) Programandwas awarded theMI4 Innovation Prize, for his andProf.Juncker’s innovation, AnemoSwab.

From theCLIC Website: Diagnosis of respiratory infections is time critical, as treatments like those for influenza are effective only within short windows, and rapid detection helps limit transmission through isolation. Samples are typically collected via nasopharyngeal or anterior nasal swabs, which are invasive, uncomfortable and discourage frequent testing.AnemoSwabproposes a new method that captures sample material from exhaled aerosols present in breath using a small 3D printed device, theAnemoSwab.

Yonatan Morocz, PhD Candidate, Biomedical Engineering, ɬ﷬;

David Juncker, Professor, Biomedical Engineering, ɬ﷬ - Scientific cofounder, CSO

Q: Firstand foremost,congratulations on winning the MI4 Innovation Prize forAnemoSwab!Could you tell us about your academic and research journeyprior tothe creation ofAnemoSwab?

I’vehad quitea long experiencewith research... itactually startedin high school, which I did in Boston. At the time, I was volunteering at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, where we were working on intraoperative mass spectrometry. In cases involving cancer patients, we would analyze swabbed tissue samples from the brain during surgery to help inform real-time clinical decision-making.

After that, I moved to Montreal for my Undergraduate degree at ɬ﷬ in Bioorganic Chemistry. That gave me a solid foundation, but I was always drawn to building things and exploring how ideas could be translated into something tangible. Following myundergrad, I did a six-month internship in computational chemistry at a contract research organization (CRO), where I worked on designing drug compounds for pancreatic cancer.After this, because I really enjoyed both designing and building things, and I wanted to integrate life sciencesin my work, I decided to pursue aMaster’s in Biomedical Engineering.

I joined David Juncker’s lab largely because of my interest in their work on 3D printing. Even before starting graduateschool, I had already bought my own 3D printer and was experimenting with it during the COVID-19 pandemic,designingand fabricating projects at home. That hands-on experience ended up beingreally usefulduring my Master’s, and it also set the stage for howAnemoSwabeventually came about.

Q:Can you tell us more aboutAnemoSwaband howthiscame about?

When I first joined the lab, this projectdidn’texist. I was initially planning to work on bioprinting organs, specifically 3D printing structures out of extracellular matrix to create organ-like systems, and I worked on that for about four months. However, since I started my PhD atthe tailend of the pandemic, aerosol-based transmission was a major area of interest. There were still many unanswered questions around how infectious individuals were, how superspreading events occurred, andoverallhow to better measure transmission risk. At the time, wedidn’thave strong systems in place to study this properly.

Around then, research wasemergingfrom Europe on portable aerosol sampling devices that could help estimate viral load and infectiousness. David showed me some of these papers, and we both becamevery interestedin the area. At that point, I was already a few months intomy work ina lab that focused on 3D printing and diagnostic devices, so it felt like a natural direction to explore how we could build on these developments.That’sreally when the project started to take shape, around January 2022.

Initially, we were interested in aerosol sampling as a more direct measurement compared to nasopharyngeal swabs, which were the standard for COVID testing at the time. Aerosol sampling has the advantage of capturing the actual transmission vector, which canprovidemore direct insight into how infectious someone is. That kind of information is useful not only for diagnostics, but also for public health decisions, like assessing transmission risk ordeterminingwhether healthcare workers should isolate.

At the same time, there was also a very practical issue:people disliked swabbing. Because of that, testing compliancewasn’talways ideal.So,we were also motivated to develop something non-invasive, something that would be as simple as breathing into a tube,similar toa breathalyzer, where the sample could then be used for testing.

Within a couple of months, we had our first prototypes, although they werevery farfrom thefinal version. The progress wasdefinitely notlinear... we would make advances, then hit setbacks, then move forward again. It was a long iterative process to get to where the technology is today.

We’vebeen working on this for almost five years now, so there has been a lot of science and engineering involved in bringing it to this stage. At the same time, people now tend to understand the general concept much more easily, largely because of the shared experienceswe’vehad as a society through COVID.

Q: When you were developing this innovation, did you have the idea that you would one day bring it into a competition like the Clinical Innovation Competition?Wasthis a goal for you?

Pretty early on, weidentifiedthat the technology was something we wanted to patent because it was novel, so it was implicit from the beginning that we believed it had value and could potentially be brought into settings like innovation competitions.That said, there were a lot ofups and downsalong the way, so at times that goal felt more tangible than at others. But overall, it was always at least partially in mind as we developed the work.

We filed a provisional patent in 2024, and we are nowin the process of enteringthe national phase, with the technology currently patent pending.

Q:What was your experienceparticipatingin the Clinical Innovation Competition, andwhat do you think helpedAnemoSwabstand out to the judges?

The competition involved a lot of work to familiarize myself with thedifferent aspects, particularly the business side, which was a learning experience for me. Itwasn’tmy first pitch competition, so I had already gained some experience over time. Initially, we lacked knowledge around the market and commercialization aspects, but through experience, and with support from the ɬ﷬ Innovations + Partnerships Office and the Technology Transfer Office, we gradually started to gaina better understanding. That knowledge also became transferable across different competitions weparticipatedin.

In terms of what made our pitch stand out,I think one key factorwas that it was quite different from many of the other projects. A lot of the other teams were focused on AI-assisted clinical planning or management tools,whereaswe were one of the few teams with a physical diagnosticcomponent.

The innovation is also verytimelyand relevant in the context of disease transmission, especially with increased attention on emerging infectious diseases,like hantavirus,in the media. Understanding aerosol-based transmission is crucial for informing public health policy, particularly in how we think about the spread of new diseases.

In addition, we have intellectual property in place (patent pending), and a clinical studycomingsoon.I think the judges were able to see that this was a serious, well-developed project, and all of these elements came together into a strong overall package.

Q:How has this experience influenced your future research or career goals?

The project and competition haveshifted my perspective a bit. When I finished my work at the CROprior to my Master’s, I wasvery impressedby the resources and infrastructure they had, and I initially envisioned myself working in a company setting focused on R&D with that level of support. Now, I see things a bit differently. In the start-up space, even though there aresometimesfewer resources, there is a lot of room for innovation, and things move and evolve very quickly. That environment allows for a lot of flexibility to adapt tonew information, learn continuously, and iterate in realtime,which is something I find very appealing.

Q:What advice would you give to students and trainees who are interested in translating their research into real-world innovation andparticipatingin competitions like this?

I’ve done a number of innovation competitions, and I really think there is no downside to participating and pitching your idea.The onlyreal costis time, but what you gain in return, especiallyfeedback, is incredibly valuable. It forces you to think about aspects of your project you might not have considered before. For example, you might have a great technical solution, but if it is too costly or not scalable, it may not beviablein practice. That kind of feedback has really helped guide our own development process.

At the same time,you have to keeptrying.We have submitted a lot of applications, and the success ratein these competitions is typicallyquite low.There are many talented people with strong ideas, so you are competing against a lot of them. Because of that, youcan’tgive up.You just have to keep trying and keep improving along the way.

Q: Can you think of any modificationsyoumadeafter competing in otherinnovationcompetitions?

We'vechanged how we phrase what we provide and learned how to better communicate and market our innovation so that it resonates with different audiences. We now focus more on what will matter most to the people listening to the pitch. As a scientist, it did not come naturally to “sell” the work, since I tended to present things very critically. Over time, I realized I could adjust the way I present the product so that it is better received and more clearly understood by listeners.

I have also presented this work at conferences, student symposiums, and other venues beyond pitch competitions, and each of these experiences has provided different feedback that has helped us develop the innovation further. Through this,I have come to appreciate how important it is to synthesize information effectively and to communicate it in a way that is accessible to non-expert audiences.

Q:Is there anything else you would like to sharewith our readersor any advice for fellow students?

I feelvery fortunateto have a supervisor who actively encourages this kind of work and leads a lab with manypreviousstart-up projects. From the beginning, he saw the potential for patenting this and developing it into something beyond just a research project.Because of that,I think finding a supervisor who supports the direction you want to take and whose vision is aligned with yours is really important.

If you are at the start of your program and think you might onedaybe interested in entrepreneurship or innovation, I would encourage you to keep in mind the potential commercial value of your work. Do not be shy about bringing those ideas up with your supervisor early on.

Thank you, Yonatan, for sharing your insights, and congratulations on your CLICsuccess. We wish you all the best on the road ahead!

Back to top