China's 'Gene Scissors' Enter the Pricing Era as Capital Flows Back to Foundational Platforms

The recent spotlight on innovative drugs has been either on ASCO or on the relentlessly declining stock market. As a result, two highly informative financing events that occurred recently have gone largely unnoticed:

On May 29, YolTech Therapeutics completed a nearly RMB 500 million Series C financing round, led by Loyal Valley Capital. Almost simultaneously, iRegene closed a RMB 210 million Series C1 round, focusing primarily on Parkinson’s disease and age-related disorders.

YolTech Therapeutics conducts in vivo gene editing, while iRegene performs chemically induced cellular reprogramming.Two years ago, neither of these two sectors would likely have been able to secure funding.At that time, the primary market for biopharmaceuticals was still mired in a period of deep adjustment. The first question investors would ask was, “Are there any business development (BD) updates?” followed by, “How long can you sustain your cash burn?” Early-stage platform companies were generally categorized as “having too distant a narrative and posing too great a challenge for exit.”

The winds of change are shifting as capital flows back into foundational technology platforms.

This round of financing was not secured through storytelling.

The distinction between in vivo and ex vivo editing directly defines the ceiling of this sector.

Ex vivo editing is exemplified by CAR-T therapy: patient cells are collected, genetically modified ex vivo, and then reinfused. The entire process requires cold-chain logistics and comprehensive medical monitoring, with a single treatment costing hundreds of thousands of US dollars. It is both a technological marvel and the ceiling for accessibility.

The logic of in vivo editing is more straightforward: gene-editing tools are delivered directly to target cells within the patient’s body, eliminating the entire ex vivo manipulation process. If safety can be firmly established, the cost curve for in vivo editing will decline much more steeply than that for ex vivo editing.

YolTech Therapeutics’ pipeline spans multiple therapeutic areas, including hepatology, neuroscience, and ophthalmology. Rather than demonstrating delivery capability in just a single organ or for a single disease, the company has conducted systematic validation across multiple target organs.The scalability of the platform is the core reason for securing nearly RMB 500 million in this round of financing.

More noteworthy is the structure of this round of financing.

Led by Founder Xingu Capital, which has invested in multiple leading companies during previous innovative drug cycles. The participation of Shanghai State-owned Investment Pioneer signifies the systematic entry of state-owned capital into the gene editing sector.The combination of a lead investor and state-owned capital indicates that this round of financing was not secured based on hype alone.

“Value Reversion of Foundational Technologies”

From 2023 to 2025, China’s biopharmaceutical primary market underwent a sustained adjustment. Total financing contracted by more than half from its 2021 peak, leading to the exit of numerous early-stage platform companies that were unable to secure follow-on funding. During this contraction, capital concentrated in two areas: clinical-stage companies with clear pipelines and successful business development (BD) progress, and industrial infrastructure represented by contract research, development, and manufacturing organizations (CXOs).

Financing data since 2026 is sending new signals. YolTech Therapeutics’ Series C and iRegene’s Series C1, combined with previous financing rounds completed by multiple gene therapy and stem cell companies, are piecing together a picture of “The Return to Value of Foundational Technologies” landscape.

Three factors drive this regression.

Technological maturity has reached a critical tipping point. Gene-editing tools have evolved from CRISPR-Cas9 to base editors and further to prime editing, with continuous improvements in precision and safety. In vivo delivery systems are also expanding from adeno-associated viruses (AAV) to non-viral vectors such as lipid nanoparticles, offering more options for targeting different organs. The technology no longer requires market education. Capital is no longer asking “Can this technology work?” but rather “For which diseases can it be used, how durable is its effect, and how safe is it?”

Clinical Data Are Providing Answers. Globally, early clinical data on in vivo gene editing for diseases such as transthyretin amyloidosis and hereditary angioedema have validated the translational pathway from mechanism to clinic. The six clinical pipelines of YolTech Therapeutics, at various stages of advancement, serve as the most direct evidence of this pathway.

The rigid demand in an aging society is rising. China’s population aged 65 and above has exceeded 200 million, with over 3 million Parkinson’s disease patients, and these figures continue to grow. Existing medications can only alleviate symptoms and cannot reverse the disease progression. If gene editing and cell replacement therapies can intervene at the etiological level, their value will disrupt the existing market landscape.

Policies are also confirming this trend. In 2026, the “Regulations on the Administration of Clinical Research and Translational Application of New Biomedical Technologies” officially came into effect, establishing the review and approval pathway for in vivo gene editing from scratch. With clear policy support and a fully aligned regulatory framework, capital follow-up has become a natural progression.

Pricing Logic

The Most Valuable Aspect of the Gene Editing Sector Lies in Its Pricing Logic for the Next Decade.

Global pricing for gene-editing therapies generally ranges from $1 million to $3 million, representing the market range for single-dose curative treatments. However, the cost structure for in vivo editing is entirely different.

Costs associated with CDMO for ex vivo editing, cold-chain logistics, and inpatient monitoring currently account for more than half of the terminal price. If in vivo editing can achieve universal production—where a single drug dose is applicable to all patients—its marginal cost will decline rapidly as production scale expands.

The current global average gross profit margin for biologics is approximately 85%; however, this figure primarily reflects the manufacturing efficiency of large-scale biologics such as PD-1 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists, and is not directly comparable to the cost structure of gene-editing products.

However, once in vivo gene editing achieves universal production, its pricing model could be based on treatment courses, indications, or regional markets.. This shift in pricing models means that the market penetration speed and depth of in vivo gene editing will far exceed those of ex vivo editing.

This is also why capital is now beginning to reinvest in foundational technology platforms. Investors are betting on in vivo gene editing as a technological paradigm, given its disruptive potential across therapeutic substitution, business models, and other dimensions. In particular, when its long-term cost curve falls below that of existing paradigms, the influx of capital becomes merely a matter of time.

See, the wind has picked up.

This article is from the WeChat official account“MedYao”, by Zhang Qinghuan, published with authorization from 36Kr.