Strug­gling poo-test­ing start­up uBio­me files for bank­rupt­cy, months af­ter FBI kicks off in­ves­ti­ga­tion

George Church Har­vard

Months af­ter the FBI launched a probe in­to its billing prac­tices, be­lea­guered poo-test­ing start­up uBio­me has filed for bank­rupt­cy.

Jes­si­ca Rich­man and Zach Apte launched uBio­me in 2012, af­ter rais­ing $350,000 from a crowd­fund­ing cam­paign to fa­cil­i­tate a mi­cro­bio­me study. The com­pa­ny — which maps the ecosys­tem of mi­crobes in the body to de­vel­op tests eval­u­at­ing gut and vagi­nal health — has since hauled in more than $100 mil­lion in ven­ture cap­i­tal from Y Com­bi­na­tor, An­dreessen Horowitz, and 8VC.

In the be­gin­ning, San Fran­cis­co-based uBio­me made all the right moves.  It wooed a num­ber of lead­ing sci­en­tists from UCSF and Har­vard, in­clud­ing ge­neti­cist George Church, on its sci­en­tif­ic ad­vi­so­ry board, re­cruit­ed for­mer con­tro­ver­sial No­var­tis CEO Joe Jimenez to its board, re­leased a hand­ful of di­rect-to-con­sumer tests de­signed to gauge mi­cro­bial health, and inked a part­ner­ship with L’Oréal to re­search the skin mi­cro­bio­me.

But soon, things start­ed to fall apart. In April, the FBI com­menced an in­ves­ti­ga­tion in­to the com­pa­ny’s billing prac­tices — even­tu­al­ly raid­ing uBio­me’s of­fices — around the time sources told CN­BC that the start­up was hound­ing doc­tors to ap­prove tests with lit­tle over­sight, billing con­sumers mul­ti­ple times with­out their con­sent —and in­sur­ance plans were start­ing to re­ject the claims.

The com­pa­ny got rid of half its staff ear­li­er this sum­mer. In ad­di­tion, in­sid­ers told Busi­ness In­sid­er that the sci­ence back­ing up its tests was flawed from the start — trig­ger­ing an in­ter­nal in­ves­ti­ga­tion. A jour­nal where uBio­me pub­lished its ba­sic re­search is al­so in­ves­ti­gat­ing the com­pa­nies claims, BI re­port­ed. The sale of some of the com­pa­ny’s tests was al­so re­cent­ly sus­pend­ed.

Short­ly af­ter the FBI in­ves­ti­ga­tion be­came pub­lic, uBio­me’s founders de­part­ed to make room for a new man­age­ment team.

In a fil­ing, uBio­me blamed its founders for much of its trou­ble. “The Founders im­ple­ment­ed cer­tain busi­ness strate­gies…that were high­ly prob­lem­at­ic, con­tained sig­nif­i­cant op­er­a­tional (but not sci­en­tif­ic) flaws and, in some in­stances, were of ques­tion­able le­gal­i­ty,” the fil­ing said.

“These is­sues in­clud­ed im­prop­er in­sur­ance provider billing prac­tices, im­prop­er use of a telemed­i­cine physi­cian net­work (known as the Ex­ter­nal Clin­i­cal Care Net­work), over­ly ag­gres­sive and po­ten­tial­ly mis­lead­ing mar­ket­ing tac­tics, ma­nip­u­la­tion of cus­tomer up­grade test­ing, and im­prop­er use of cus­tomer in­duce­ments. More­over, cer­tain in­for­ma­tion pre­sent­ed to po­ten­tial in­vestors dur­ing the three rounds of cap­i­tal raise my have been in­cor­rect and/or mis­lead­ing.”

“(W)hile the Debtor ex­pe­ri­enced a se­ri­ous set­back as a re­sult of the (FBI) In­ves­ti­ga­tion, the In­ves­ti­ga­tion re­sult­ed from the busi­ness prac­tices im­ple­ment­ed by the Founders, not bad sci­ence or bad lab prac­tices. The Debtor has es­tab­lished a new Board and a new Busi­ness Plan, and is poised to move for­ward. This Chap­ter 11 Case will pro­vide the fresh start nec­es­sary to do so.”

Af­ter fil­ing for bank­rupt­cy, uBio­me has se­cured $8 mil­lion in fi­nanc­ing from Sil­i­con Val­ley Bank. The start­up is seek­ing to con­sum­mate a sale of its busi­ness with­in the first 75 days, and in a sep­a­rate fil­ing un­veiled it cur­rent­ly has as­sets worth $50 to $100 mil­lion, an es­ti­mat­ed li­a­bil­i­ties in the range of $10 to $50 mil­lion.

Health­care Dis­par­i­ties and Sick­le Cell Dis­ease

In the complicated U.S. healthcare system, navigating a serious illness such as cancer or heart disease can be remarkably challenging for patients and caregivers. When that illness is classified as a rare disease, those challenges can become even more acute. And when that rare disease occurs in a population that experiences health disparities, such as people with sickle cell disease (SCD) who are primarily Black and Latino, challenges can become almost insurmountable.

The End­points 11: They've got mad mon­ey and huge am­bi­tions. It's time to go big or go home

These days, selecting a group of private biotechs for the Endpoints 11 spotlight begins with a sprint to get ahead of IPOs and the M&A teams at Big Pharma. I’ve had a couple of faceplants earlier this year, watching some of the biotechs on my short list choose a quick leap onto Nasdaq or into the arms of a buyer.

Vividion, you would have been a great pick for the Endpoints 11. I’m sorry I missed you.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

Dave Lennon, former president of Novartis Gene Therapies

So what hap­pened with No­var­tis Gene Ther­a­pies? Here's your an­swer

Over the last couple of days it’s become clear that the gene therapy division at Novartis has quietly undergone a major reorganization. We learned on Monday that Dave Lennon, who had pursued a high-profile role as president of the unit with 1,500 people, had left the pharma giant to take over as CEO of a startup.

Like a lot of the majors, Novartis is an open highway for head hunters, or anyone looking to staff a startup. So that was news but not completely unexpected.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

Who are the women su­per­charg­ing bio­phar­ma R&D? Nom­i­nate them for this year's spe­cial re­port

The biotech industry has faced repeated calls to diversify its workforce — and in the last year, those calls got a lot louder. Though women account for just under half of all biotech employees around the world, they occupy very few places in C-suites, and even fewer make it to the helm.

Some companies are listening, according to a recent BIO survey which showed that this year’s companies were 2.5 times more likely to have a diversity and inclusion program compared to last year’s sample. But we still have a long way to go. Women represent just 31% of biotech executives, BIO reported. And those numbers are even more stark for women of color.

FDA+ roundup: Bs­U­FA III ready for show­time, court tells FDA to re-work com­pound­ing plan, new guid­ance up­dates and more

The FDA has now spelled out what exactly will be included in the third iteration of Biosimilar User Fee Act (BsUFA) from 2023 through 2027, which similarly to the prescription drug deal, sets fees that industry has to pay for submitting applications, in exchange for firm timelines that the agency must meet.

This latest deal includes several sweeteners for the biosimilar industry, which has yet to make great strides in the US market, with shorter review timelines for safety labeling updates and updates to add or remove an indication that does not contain efficacy data.

Endpoints Premium

Premium subscription required

Unlock this article along with other benefits by subscribing to one of our paid plans.

Jean Bennett (Brent N. Clarke/Invision/AP Images)

Lux­tur­na in­ven­tor Jean Ben­nett starts a new gene ther­a­py com­pa­ny to tack­le rare dis­eases left be­hind by phar­ma, VCs

A few years ago Jean Bennett found herself in a surprising place for a woman who invented the first gene therapy ever approved in the United States: No one, it seemed, wanted her work.

Bennett, who designed and co-developed Luxturna, approved in 2018 for a rare form of blindness, had kept building new gene therapies for eye diseases at her University of Pennsylvania lab. But although the results in animals looked promising, pharma companies and investors kept turning down the pedigreed ophthalmology professor.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 118,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

FDA au­tho­rizes Pfiz­er's vac­cine boost­er for se­niors, those at high risk for se­vere Covid-19

The Biden administration’s goal of kicking off its booster shot drive for the entire US population this week is not quite going as planned.

First, Pfizer applied for approval of a supplemental application for the booster shots, but since last Friday’s adcomm reviewing them, the plan has devolved into an EUA, which the FDA issued late Thursday evening.

The population that is now eligible for the booster, six months after receiving the first pair of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, also narrowed from what Pfizer applied for (everyone who’s eligible for the initial Pfizer shots) to just those who are 65 or older, or at high-risk of a Covid infection, including health care workers and others with occupational hazards.

When ef­fi­ca­cy is bor­der­line: FDA needs to get more con­sis­tent on close-call drug ap­provals, agency-fund­ed re­search finds

In the exceedingly rare instances in which clinical efficacy is the only barrier to a new drug’s approval, new FDA-funded research from FDA and Stanford found that the agency does not have a consistent standard for defining “substantial evidence” when flexible criteria are used for an approval.

The research comes as the FDA is at a crossroads with its expedited-review pathways. The accelerated approval pathway is under fire as the agency recently signed off on a controversial new Alzheimer’s drug, with little precedent to explain its decision. Meanwhile, top officials like Rick Pazdur have called for a major push to simplify and clarify all of the various expedited pathways, which have grown to be must-haves for sponsors of nearly every newly approved drug.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 118,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Stéphane Bancel, AP Images

Fi­nal analy­sis of US-fund­ed Mod­er­na Covid vac­cine tri­al shows 98% ef­fi­ca­cy against se­vere dis­ease

A final look at the results of the placebo-controlled Moderna trial in the New England Journal of Medicine, published Thursday afternoon, shows how the vaccine continues to prevent Covid-19 and severe cases after more than five months following the second shot.

Of the more than 30,000 enrolled in the trial that ultimately led to the vaccine’s EUA, only two people in the vaccine group got a severe form of the disease, compared to 106 in the placebo group — leading to an efficacy of 98%.