Connect with us

Insight

Can biotech help close the fertility gap? Inside the race to improve egg quality

Published

on

With delayed parenthood now the norm, a new wave of biotech innovators is targeting the root cause of rising infertility rates. Oxford-based startup U-Ploid tells Femtech World how addressing egg ageing could reduce the “age penalty” that currently defines fertility outcomes.

Infertility now affects an estimated one in six people worldwide, with the World Health Organization determining it to be a “major public health issue.” 

Across the OECD, the average age of first-time mothers has risen consistently over the past decades, driven by economic pressures, career progression, delayed partnership, and the availability of contraception. But human biology has not kept pace with this societal shift.

Egg quality declines sharply with age, beginning as early as the mid-thirties. It is this decline, not the body’s ability to carry a pregnancy, that remains the most significant factor behind falling conception rates.

IVF attempts to work around this challenge, yet even with technological advances, success rates remain modest. For women aged 18-34, birth rates per embryo transfer were around 35 per cent in 2022, dropping to five per cent by the age of 43-43.

“Fertility outcomes fall, not because the body is unable to sustain a pregnancy, but because egg quality declines with age,” Dr Alexandre Webster, co-founder and chief scientific officer at Oxford-based biotech firm, U-Ploid, tells Femtech World. 

“Most existing fertility treatments are limited in how directly they can address this biological constraint. While IVF has advanced significantly in helping clinicians identify embryos with the best chance of success, there are currently very few options to intervene earlier and improve the quality of the eggs themselves.”

Current fertility treatments tend to focus on hormonal stimulation to produce more eggs, improving embryo selection, or improving implantation rates through uterine optimisation. 

But none of these approaches address the root cause of age-related infertility, which is the egg’s declining ability to divide its chromosomes correctly.

This unmet need has set the stage for a new generation of reproductive biotech innovators, focusing on novel therapeutics, cellular engineering, AI-driven diagnostics, and biomarkers that could change how infertility is understood and treated.

A new frontier in fertility treatment

Among these innovators, U-Ploid is pioneering a new therapeutic category with Lyvanta, a first-of-its-kind drug aimed at improving egg quality by addressing the biological mechanisms of maternal ageing.

Central to its approach is meiotic aneuploidy, which occurs when chromosomes fail to separate correctly as an egg matures. This increases dramatically with age, Webster explains, and is the leading cause of failed IVF cycles, miscarriage, and natural infertility. Studies have shown that over 50–80 per cent of embryos from women in their early 40s exhibit chromosomal abnormalities.

Lyvanta is designed to reduce the risk of these errors at the egg stage, before fertilisation occurs. It is injected into the egg before IVF, where it acts to stabilise chromosome segregation during meiosis. 

“What makes this approach distinct is that, today, there are no approved or clinically available therapies that directly address meiotic aneuploidy or improve egg quality at its biological source,” Webster says.

“Lyvanta therefore represents a genuinely new therapeutic category. It does not act on embryos, does not alter DNA, and does not involve genetic modification. Instead, it supports a natural biological process that becomes increasingly error-prone with age.”

Evidence-gathering and regulatory engagement 

The programme is grounded in over a decade of global academic research in chromosome biology and maternal ageing, and U-Ploid has carried out mechanistic studies, preclinical validation in aged animal models, and tightly regulated human egg studies in collaboration with IVF clinics.

However, the drug is still in the early stages of development, and the company is taking a cautious, evidence-driven approach. 

Over the next one to two years, the research team will focus on building the scientific evidence needed to demonstrate clinical safety and efficacy. Meanwhile, regulatory engagement is ongoing, and timelines will depend on the outcomes of these studies.

“As with any new therapeutic, progress toward the clinic requires careful, stepwise evidence generation and regulatory review,” Webster says. 

“Our focus at this stage is on ensuring that any future progress happens within established scientific, ethical, and regulatory frameworks. We engage with regulators, clinicians, and patient stakeholders to understand expectations around safety, evidence, transparency, and consent, and to ensure that the questions being asked of a new reproductive therapeutic are addressed rigorously and appropriately.”

He adds: “Lyvanta will only move forward if it meets the required standards set by regulators and ethics bodies, and only following thorough evaluation.”

If successful, the impact could be considerable. Improved egg quality may mean fewer IVF cycles, more viable embryos, and overall better outcomes for patients.

“If a therapy like Lyvanta can safely improve egg quality, it could lead to more viable embryos per IVF cycle, fewer cycles needed to achieve pregnancy, and better outcomes for people whose chances of success currently decline sharply with age,” Webster says. 

“While much work remains, this is the long-term impact we are working toward.”

Global access and affordability

Globally, infertility affects people at similar rates regardless of income, but access to advanced treatments is often dependent on financial barriers.

IVF remains expensive worldwide. In the UK and US, a complete IVF cycle typically costs several thousand to tens of thousands of pounds, often requiring multiple attempts. 

“One of the reasons fertility treatment is so costly and emotionally taxing is that patients often require multiple IVF cycles to achieve a successful outcome,” says Webster.

“Indeed, some 70 per cent of couples that start an IVF journey will end it with no baby, having run out of money and patience before a successful outcome.

By making each IVF cycle more efficient, it could reduce some of these costs and make treatment more accessible to more people. 

“By improving egg quality upstream, Lyvanta has the potential to increase efficiency per cycle, which could reduce the overall burden, financial, physical, and emotional, on patients and healthcare systems,” Webster says. 

The therapy is also being designed to integrate into existing IVF workflows, without requiring new infrastructure or highly specialised equipment.

He adds: “By focusing on improving biological efficiency rather than adding complexity, we believe this approach has the potential to support broader access over time, including in low- and middle-income countries where need is high but resources are limited.”

The new wave of fertility innovation 

U-Ploid is part of a new wave of fertility biotech innovators. Companies such as Oxolife, developing a first-in-class oral drug to improve implantation; Gameto, engineering ovarian support cells to optimise IVF and egg freezing; and Genie Fertility, uncovering molecular biomarkers to personalise reproductive care, are all reshaping the field.

While progress in the fertility space has been incremental for decades, breakthroughs in chromosome biology, cell engineering, and molecular therapeutics are changing what might be possible.

This new generation of therapeutic innovation could improve outcomes and expand options for millions navigating delayed parenthood, and allow fertility science to catch up with the realities of modern life.

“Our aim is to reduce the biological ‘age penalty’ that currently defines fertility outcomes, so that success is less tightly coupled to chronological age,” Webster adds. 

“If successful, this could allow more people to build families on timelines that reflect modern social and economic realities.”



News

Bridging the metabolic wealth gap: The telehealth platform bypassing insurance to democratise care

Published

on

As weight-loss treatments remain locked behind prohibitive paywalls, a new direct-pay initiative is cutting costs in half for low-income patients, and it could provide a new blueprint for health equity.

It is one of the most persistent, frustrating paradoxes in modern healthcare: the medical innovations most capable of addressing widespread chronic conditions are overwhelmingly priced out of reach for the populations most vulnerable to them.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the current landscape of metabolic health and weight management.

As state governments and insurance providers increasingly restrict coverage for advanced weight-loss medications due to skyrocketing costs, a stark dividing line has emerged. Clinical need is no longer the primary factor in who receives treatment. Affordability is.

This financial barrier disproportionately impacts women, who not only face high rates of metabolic conditions but also frequently serve as the primary caregivers in their households.

For a single mother managing childcare, grueling work hours, and the relentlessly rising cost of living, personal well-being is often the first casualty of a tight budget.

These patients are forced into a holding pattern, watching their conditions progress year after year while highly effective, life-changing treatments remain separated from them by a paywall.

Now, a telehealth platform called Amble Health is attempting to dismantle that wall by bypassing the traditional insurance apparatus entirely.

A Structural Shift for Access

Today, Amble Health announced the launch of the Amble Cares Program, a national initiative designed to cut the cost of medical weight-loss treatments in half for low-income Americans.

The programme arrives at a critical inflection point.

Today, roughly one in eight U.S. adults have utilized advanced metabolic medications, according to a recent KFF Health Tracking Poll.

This surge in adoption has driven a fundamental shift in preventative care, but the distribution of that care has been deeply uneven.

Through the Amble Cares Program, eligible patients can access comprehensive medical weight-loss programmes, which may include prescription medications if clinically appropriate, at up to 50 per cent below standard rates.

To ensure the discounts reach the intended demographic, eligibility is determined by an independent, third-party verification partner, based on verified financial need.

The programme explicitly prioritises individuals and families with limited disposable income, including parents and guardians whose financial flexibility is tied up in providing for dependents.

Once verified, patients are connected directly to licensed clinicians to begin treatment immediately, stripping away the friction of waiting periods.

“Healthcare should not be a luxury item,” said Joey Stiver, CEO of Amble Health. At Amble, we believe that a patient’s zip code or income shouldn’t dictate their metabolic health outcomes.

“The Amble Cares Program is our direct response to the cost of living crisis, moving beyond talk of ‘affordability’ to actually delivering it to the people the traditional system has left behind.”

The Direct-Pay Trade-Off

However, this rapid, lower-cost access comes with a significant structural trade-off.

To achieve these price reductions and eliminate the administrative delays, denials, and red tape associated with traditional healthcare, Amble Health operates strictly as a direct-pay platform.

This means participants cannot use outside coverage. The programme does not accept Medicaid, Medicare, commercial insurance, or even HSA/FSA funds.

For some patients, being entirely locked out of utilizing their existing health benefits may present a new kind of hurdle.

But for those who have already found themselves abandoned by traditional coverage networks, facing outright denials, unnavigable prior authorisations, or insurmountable deductibles, the direct-pay model offers a predictable, transparent alternative to a broken system.

Ultimately, the Amble Cares Program is making a bold bet: that the most efficient way to deliver equitable healthcare to disenfranchised populations isn’t to fix the traditional insurance system, but to innovate entirely around it.

Continue Reading

News

UK report warns against ‘financial half measures’ for women’s health

Published

on

The Women and Equalities Committee (WEC) has warned against “financial half measures” on women’s health as the government published its response to the report.

Ministers launched the renewed Women’s Health Strategy in April after the committee’s March report concluded it was not convinced that the menstrual and gynaecological needs of young women and girls had been sufficiently prioritised in wider healthcare reforms.

It followed the committee’s 2024 “medical misogyny” report, which found women with painful reproductive health conditions such as endometriosis, adenomyosis and heavy menstrual bleeding were frequently finding their symptoms “normalised” and their “pain dismissed” when seeking help.

In both reports, MPs called on the government to recognise the benefits of increased investment in early diagnosis and treatment of women’s reproductive health conditions and provide additional funding needed to transform the support available to millions of women.

In its response, published on 26 May as a command paper, the Department of Health and Social Care outlined action on reducing gynae waiting times, ensuring procedures are conducted with women’s full consent and adequate pain relief, and improving access to contraception for menstrual healthcare in line with the committee’s recommendations.

It said: “The government agrees with the committee’s overarching findings and recommendations for improving women’s health outcomes and experiences.

“We acknowledge the impact that menstrual health conditions can have on women’s lives, relationships, and participation in education and the workforce.

“We recognise that more needs to be done to support women with menstrual health conditions, particularly around listening to women, improving information and education, and enhancing patient experience.”

However, there was no commitment to increase school nurse provision, no measurable actions and targets on countering online misinformation, no new commitments to end inappropriate censorship of women’s online health content, and no further initiatives on tackling racial discrimination or understanding the menstrual wellbeing needs of young disabled and Deaf women.

The response comes after analysis by The Times suggested the government is allocating 60 per cent more funding to its men’s health strategy than to its renewed strategy for women’s health.

Sarah Owen, chair of the Women and Equalities Committee and Labour MP, said: “WEC’s 2024 ‘medical misogyny’ report warned 18 months ago of women in unnecessary pain and undiagnosed for years and called on the Government to recognise the benefits of increased investment in early diagnosis and treatment.

“Our follow up report this March cautioned girls’ and women’s health are not being sufficiently prioritised in system-wide NHS reforms, while initiatives which have proven to be successful in reducing waiting lists and improving women’s healthcare access, such as women’s health hubs, risked being scaled back or discontinued.

“While it’s welcome to see a focus on tackling ‘medical misogyny’ in April’s renewed Women’s Health Strategy and an emphasis on women’s voices being heard, this must be backed by adequate funding, not financial half measures, particularly when compared to men’s health.

“Significant questions remain following today’s response publication over the adequacy of investment being provided, including for workforce training, menstrual health education in schools, research and additional ring-fenced funding for women’s health hubs to deliver services within the emerging neighbourhood health framework.

“There are both opportunities and risks when it comes to increasing use of technology in women’s healthcare.

“As the Committee’s report set out, social media companies should be held to account for inappropriate and disgraceful ‘shadow banning’ censorship of important women’s health content and there should be a rigorous approach to tackling the risks from ineffective, unsafe and exploitative for-profit FemTech apps.

“The Government should take the problem of ‘shadow banning’ more seriously.

“A strategy which does not fully address the concerns set out in WEC’s report, alongside measurable actions and timescales, will only scratch the surface of the issues facing women’s health.

“WEC will keep a close eye on progress and continue to push for long overdue tangible change for women and girls.”

Continue Reading

Insight

Early PET scan could chemo response in aggressive breast cancer – study

Published

on

An early PET scan after one cycle of chemotherapy may help predict how aggressive breast cancer responds to treatment, a study suggests.

Research led by The Institute of Cancer Research, London and King’s College London suggests that an early scan taken after one cycle of chemotherapy could help predict how well a patient’s cancer will respond to treatment.

The study focused on patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), an aggressive form of the disease in which cancer cells lack receptors for the hormones oestrogen and progesterone, as well as the HER2 protein.

Patients with TNBC are usually treated with chemotherapy prior to surgery. While many respond well, residual disease at surgery, typically around six months later, is associated with a significantly poorer prognosis. Identifying people sooner who are unlikely to respond remains a major clinical challenge.

The research explored whether using PET imaging shortly after treatment begins, rather than relying only on MRI scans later in the treatment process, could provide earlier insight into how a patient’s cancer is responding. Twenty-two patients were recruited, with fourteen undergoing FDG-PET scans before treatment and after the first cycle of chemotherapy.

The findings, published in Clinical Cancer Research, showed that changes seen on PET scans after just one cycle of chemotherapy were strongly associated with subsequent response, including whether there was no detectable cancer, known as a complete response, by the end of treatment. Importantly, early PET response showed stronger associations with treatment outcomes than standard mid-treatment MRI scans in this study.

Being able to identify patients who are not responding well at an early stage could allow clinicians to adjust treatment sooner or consider alternative approaches. These findings may also support future strategies to better tailor treatment intensity to individual patients.

The study also compared two types of PET tracers, FDG and FLT, to determine which was most suitable. While both met the study’s technical criteria, FDG-PET was selected for further evaluation due to its better image quality, greater consistency and wider use in clinical practice.

The research also explored how imaging changes after just one cycle of chemotherapy relate to the body’s immune response to treatment. Biopsies taken before and after the first cycle of chemotherapy showed that an increase in immune cells within the tumour was strongly associated with both early PET changes and improved treatment outcomes.

The researchers emphasise that these findings now need to be validated in larger studies. Future work will aim to confirm these results in broader patient groups and explore more accessible imaging approaches, such as ultrasound, alongside PET and MRI.

Sheeba Irshad, professor of cancer immunology at King’s College London and lead of the Breast Cancer Now KCL Research Unit, said:

“In patients who had PET scans both before treatment and after the first cycle, we found that this early scan could predict whether they were likely to achieve a complete response by the end of treatment. These findings highlight the potential of early imaging to guide treatment decisions, and now need to be validated in larger, modern clinical trials.”

Andrew Tutt, professor of breast oncology at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, said:

“Research that helps us determine early who is already benefitting from standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy and who might benefit from clinical trials to find better treatments is vital. This study shows that FDG-PET may have great value in this regard. We hope to be able to design studies that further investigate and validate these findings.”

The study was supported by funding from King’s College London and Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, Breast Cancer Now, Cancer Research UK, and Guy’s and St Thomas’ Charity.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 Aspect Health Media Ltd. All Rights Reserved.