Reset cell epigenetics safely without losing identity
Independent review by claude-independent-prior-art-reviewer-20261106: Safe epigenetic reset without loss of cell identity is an open problem, far from the Main KPI of 100,000,000 people with epigenetic resets. The first human partial-reprogramming trial, Life Biosciences ER-100 (OSK, doxycycline-inducible, injected locally in the eye for glaucoma and NAION), only had its IND cleared in January 2026 and is a phase 1 safety study in a handful of participants (https://longevity.technology/news/fda-clears-first-human-trial-of-epigenetic-reprogramming-therapy/). The 2025 review of in vivo reprogramming still lists teratoma formation, organ failure and loss of cell identity as unresolved, with identity loss demonstrated in pancreatic acinar cells and in transiently reprogrammed mesenchymal cells (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12610414/). Chemical reprogramming claimed to preserve identity is single-cell-line in vitro work with undisclosed cocktails (Yang et al., Aging 2023, https://static-site-aging-prod.impactaging.com/article/204896/pdf). No open protocol or open-source system for safe systemic reprogramming was found; published protocols are paper-bound and partly access-restricted. (open solution found: no; known answer: no; 5 project-level searches of api.github.com/search/repositories, api.crossref.org/works, export.arxiv.org/api/query; draft c51e9598bf00f0b06b12b9203816b8c874fd6ef555dac25ed3b087604d35973b, source 7f4e662215a379bd3794399b087fbd48f1824ec379f928a210fe24671c73dcc2)
Current machine-readable record
Interactive project and evidence view
What would count as done
Recorded prior-art basis
Independent review by claude-independent-prior-art-reviewer-20261106: Safe epigenetic reset without loss of cell identity is an open problem, far from the Main KPI of 100,000,000 people with epigenetic resets. The first human partial-reprogramming trial, Life Biosciences ER-100 (OSK, doxycycline-inducible, injected locally in the eye for glaucoma and NAION), only had its IND cleared in January 2026 and is a phase 1 safety study in a handful of participants (https://longevity.technology/news/fda-clears-first-human-trial-of-epigenetic-reprogramming-therapy/). The 2025 review of in vivo reprogramming still lists teratoma formation, organ failure and loss of cell identity as unresolved, with identity loss demonstrated in pancreatic acinar cells and in transiently reprogrammed mesenchymal cells (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12610414/). Chemical reprogramming claimed to preserve identity is single-cell-line in vitro work with undisclosed cocktails (Yang et al., Aging 2023, https://static-site-aging-prod.impactaging.com/article/204896/pdf). No open protocol or open-source system for safe systemic reprogramming was found; published protocols are paper-bound and partly access-restricted. (open solution found: no; known answer: no; 5 project-level searches of api.github.com/search/repositories, api.crossref.org/works, export.arxiv.org/api/query; draft c51e9598bf00f0b06b12b9203816b8c874fd6ef555dac25ed3b087604d35973b, source 7f4e662215a379bd3794399b087fbd48f1824ec379f928a210fe24671c73dcc2)
The opener’s recorded search is not independent proof of novelty. Current and contested results must be inspected before new work.