#1

Let’s catalog the current gene therapies currently on offer to the general public. I’d like to list: Company, gene therapeutic targets offered, vectors offered, price, and location.

Here’s what I know:
Integrated Health Systems is the only one I’ve spoken with (Dr Sewell).
Vector: AAV, so the duration is permanent, with some attenuation over decades
Gene targets: hTert, FST, KLOTHO, PGC-1alpha, and others.
Costs - I got quoted 589k for dual gene therapy of FST and hTert, with FST involving site injections in ~150 muscle locations.
Location: Moneterrey Mexico, or they can travel to you if it’s legal where you live (not US).

Eterna
Vector: They use plasmids, so the duration is only 1 ~ 2 years (I think)
Targets - FST, ?others?

Bioviva
Vectors - AAV and CMV, so duration is indefinite

Minicircle
Vector - Plasmid, so duration is 12-18 months
Target - FST
Cost - 25k
Location: Prospera, Roatan, Honduras

12 Likes
The Current Cost of Anti-Aging Gene Therapy
#2

It’s where I think the future lies, I’m especially drawn to somatic reprogramming with Yamanaka factors.

#3

How many people do you think have 600k plus for for an “experimental” treatment?

2 Likes
#4

Hopefully the rich will be the ‘pioneers’, for the rest of us ‘settlers’

3 Likes
#5

If the cost was $6.000, most people in the US cound not afford the cost.

That is reality.

3 Likes
#6

1% of the US population.

#7

Personally I like to get my genes to function properly rather than change them to something not tested by evolution.

My test results imply I am making some progress in that area.

2 Likes
#9

Lots of early tech starts out extremely expensive. That’s not a reason to hate on it or to doubt it can’t scale and become affordable one day. It helps with the speedup of scaling for early adopters who can afford it to pay the exorbitant prices. Demonstrates there’s market demand, which helps drive investment, and it helps fund the tech needed to scale. And helps derisk the tech for the rest. It’s also plausible healthcare could rationally fund some of these some day.

6 Likes
#10

Bioviva used to link to Integrated health systems from their website, I didn’t realize they were separate. Are the therapies you got quotes for telomerase and myostatin?

#11

Idk if they are separate. Maybe they aren’t.

#12

Does anyone have new info on myostatin inhibitor, either pharma or natural?

#13

John, myostatin inhibition is one of Minicircle’s area of therapeutic focus… (via follistatin). Years ago I worked on a gene therapy company for increasing intra-muscular IGF1 over-expression (think additional copies of the IGF-1 gene in muscles) to achieve the same thing… but it didn’t make it to commercialization (for non-technical reasons). IGF-1 Therapy Improves Muscle Size and Function in Experimental Peripheral Arterial Disease - PMC and IGF1 stimulates greater muscle hypertrophy in the absence of myostatin in male mice in: Journal of Endocrinology Volume 234 Issue 2 (2017)

Have you review the information on their approach? I’ve not seen any new information… other than that Bryan Johnson is trying it now. Minicircle: This biohacking company is using a crypto city to test controversial gene therapies (MIT Tech Rev)

Here: Follistatin injections via Minicircle plasmids? They're recruiting new volunteers for trials in Honduras

Bryan Johnson’s Follistatin efforts: Bryan Johnson's Longevity Protocol - Your Thoughts? - #476 by scta123

3 Likes
#14

Thanks for the info. Very interesting. Seems like Igf1 combo Myostatin inhibitor may be required for both fiber numbers as well as size. Not so sure of the temporary effect if the DNA injections. My older brother is a disabled vet with accelerating sarco like many of us seniors. Looking for answers and the VA has it’s limitations. Also tbi/ late onset dementia for which I am considering starting him on a low dose weekly rapa regimen hoping for a little cog/ neuro help possibly slowing the process. Thanks again for all you do. John

1 Like
#15

“The future [of gene therapy] is very bright,” Kevin Davies, the executive editor of The CRISPR Journal and author of Editing Humanity: The CRISPR Revolution and the New Era of Genome Editing, tells Inverse . “But I don’t don’t think anybody in the field wants to get too complacent because it was less than 25 years ago that we were riding a similar initial wave of enthusiasm for the technology.”

Here’s what 2024 and beyond has in store for our gene-edited future…

1 Like
#16

Prices of gene therapy may come down faster than expected… but from the story its not clear exactly how broad this may be, does it make AAV vector more accessible and without patent license fees? Does anyone here follow this market segment closely and know the implications exactly?

big #AAV #GeneTherapy news on a Friday! Court invalidated
@REGENXBIO 's claims against @Sarepta saying AAV9 patent is invalid b/c it’s based on DNA sequences found in nature! Huge implications for all naturally occurring capsid IP!

Sarepta Therapeutics (SRPT.O) convinced a Delaware federal court on Friday to end a patent lawsuit filed by biotech company Regenxbio (RGNX.O) and the University of Pennsylvania over Sarepta’s treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD).

U.S. District Judge Richard Andrews determined that the patent Sarepta was accused of infringing, related to Regenxbio’s competing gene-therapy technology, was invalid.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/sarepta-defeats-regenxbio-upenn-patent-lawsuit-over-muscular-dystrophy-treatment-2024-01-05/

1 Like
#17

Anyone tried or know more about the follistatin? At 25k it’s expensive but affordable for many if it really did increase lifespan 30%. BJ doing it makes it seem legit. Does it have to be repeated since its plasmids?

Regarding long term cost, of course it will be expensive at first and then the cost will come down to appeal to mass market. That’s the miracle of capitalism. You can see it in basically all mature products. The wealthy take the same rapamycin as us.

1 Like
#18

Peter Diamandis has also recently tweeted / retweeted a bit about it - you might want to look into those tweets and see if they lead to any good info.

1 Like
#19

I think that is not the correct way to think about it if you are not a mouse.

There may still be an ok cost-risk / benefit trade here - but think you have to evaluate it as very experimental and out there on the biohacking continuum before there is more human (and other large animal data).

1 Like
#20

Of course everyone should do their own research to make their own decision in such a frontier - but BJ has a team of docs that evaluated it, and that’s a big vote of confidence - and they’re probably better suited to evaluating it than me.

1 Like
#21

I would like to understand the reasoning rather than trust someone else’s advisors.