The first attempts to create anti-aging drugs ended in failure: Unity Biotechnology's senolytics did not help with osteoarthritis, and resTORbio's TORC1 inhibitor missed its goal in a study of respiratory infections in the elderly. These failures deepened the skepticism of investors and regulators, exposing the gap between animal data and real clinical outcomes.
Today, against the backdrop of population aging — by 2050 the number of people over 60 years of age will double — the field of longevity therapeutics is changing. Companies are abandoning the idea of treating "aging as such" and instead developing drugs through recognized diseases: actinic keratosis, early Parkinson's disease, optic neuropathy. This approach provides clear endpoints and regulatory pathways.
The second wave relies on large human datasets and specific mechanisms: cellular senescence, inflammation via NLRP3 and IL-11, mitochondrial dysfunction, NAD+ and partial epigenetic reprogramming. BioAge Labs is advancing an NLRP3 inhibitor for obesity and cardiovascular risk, Rubedo is testing a GPX4 modulator for actinic keratosis, and Stealth Biotherapeutics is conducting a phase 3 trial of elamipretide for dry age-related macular degeneration.
Funding has concentrated: in 2024 the industry raised 8,5 billion dollars, in 2025 — 5,7 billion. The money is going to a smaller number of platforms with a stronger scientific base — Altos Labs, NewLimit, Life Biosciences, Retro Biosciences. Large rounds allow them to work without pressure for quick partnerships with pharma.
Key data are expected in 2027–2028. BioAge plans results for BGE-102 in the second half of 2026, and Life Biosciences began phase 1 of its candidate ER-100 in June 2026. These trials will show whether the mechanisms work in humans, not just in models.
The regulatory landscape is evolving too. The ARPA-H VITAL-H study will compare rapamycin, dapagliflozin and semaglutide by measures of health and intrinsic capacity in 726 elderly people. The THRIVE program and code MG2A in the WHO's ICD-11 create a basis for assessing health span without recognizing aging as a disease. However, there is still no full approval pathway for a longevity drug.
Imagine a doctor who, instead of waiting for a patient to develop diabetes or heart failure, intervenes at the level of one of the "hallmarks of aging" — for example, inflammation. Such an approach makes it possible to obtain the first evidence faster than in multi-year lifespan studies, but it does not remove the main question: will the benefit be transferable to other age-related diseases.
Future results will determine whether longevity therapeutics remains a niche for enthusiasts or becomes part of standard medicine, where intervention in the biology of aging is measured not by promises but by reproducible clinical effect.
