BIO 暴涨 105% 背后:AI 制药初现端倪,但距离真正上市还很远

MarsBitPublished on 2026-05-07Last updated on 2026-05-07

Abstract

AI 代理 peptAI 用 24 小时设计出 ADHD 候选药物,BIO Protocol 代币暴涨 105%,加密推特瞬间被"DeSci"刷屏。

作者:Muhammad Yusuf,Research @Delphi_Digital

编译:深潮 TechFlow

深潮导读:AI 代理 peptAI 用 24 小时设计出 ADHD 候选药物,BIO Protocol 代币暴涨 105%,加密推特瞬间被"DeSci"刷屏。但冷静下来看数据:AI 发现的药物通过 I 期临床成功率确实高达 80-90%,但 I 期只测试"会不会死人",真正决定能否治病的 III 期临床,目前全球 173 个 AI 药物管线里一个都没跑完。最乐观的预测是 2028 年才会看到第一个 FDA 批准,而加密市场的注意力周期连 6 个月都撑不住——这场游戏的终局,要么是 DeSci 找到适配 4 年临床周期的融资机制,要么就是又一轮叙事泡沫的破裂。

AI 药物发现

一个叫 peptAI 的 AI 代理用 24 小时从零开始设计了一种新型 ADHD 肽类候选药物,跑完八道验证流程,输出一个可以直接送去湿实验室测试的分子。实验室工作只花了几千美元。BIO Protocol 的代币暴涨 105%,几小时内,半个加密推特的简介里都加上了"DeSci",就像六个月前他们都加上"AI"一样。

开源蛋白质折叠模型现在能以零授权成本达到 AlphaFold3 的水平,公开的生物活性数据库覆盖 250 万种化合物,湿实验室验证成本不到 2000 美元。AI 正在压缩药物发现的成本和时间。

我花了一周时间想搞清楚,这次到底有什么真正不同的地方。

通过 I 期临床不算本事

流传的数字是 AI 发现的药物 I 期临床成功率达到 80-90%,而传统药物约为 47%。但没人补充的是,I 期只测试药物会不会杀死你,不测试能不能治好你。通过 I 期只意味着你的化合物足够安全可以继续研究,但还得走完剩下的全部流程,一直到 FDA 批准。

报告 II 期数据的 AI 发现化合物不到 40 个,完成 III 期的为零。Insilico Medicine 的 Rentosertib 是目前最先进的 AI 发现化合物,2025 年中在《自然医学》发表了治疗特发性肺纤维化的阳性 IIa 期结果,2025 年第四季度在中国开始 III 期入组。如果一切完美(2027 年完成入组,2028 年数据公布,2029 年 FDA 审查),你看到的是至少三年时间——这还是 173 个药物管线里最好的候选药物,其中多个化合物在 2025 年因为在特应性皮炎、精神分裂症和癌症中未达终点而被搁置。独立分析师认为首个 AI 设计药物到 2027 年获 FDA 批准的概率是 60%,目前还没有一个 AI 设计的药物完成这个流程。

加密推特能撑住真正的 DeSci 吗?

现在把这些时间线记在脑子里,再看看 BIO Protocol 的 K 线图。代币从 0.89 美元跌到 0.018 美元,然后在 peptAI 消息后暴涨 105%,7.2 亿美元交易量在 6800 万美元市值里翻腾。整个 DeSci 融资逻辑的前提是,代币持有者会耐心等待 7 到 10 年的临床项目,而加密推特在 I 期数据揭盲之前就会转向下一个叙事。

Pump Science 在 GitHub 上泄露了自己的私钥,催生了一堆诈骗代币,包括一个真的叫 Cocaine 的。IP-NFT 的可执行性从未在法庭上测试过。

开源科学 VS DeSci

如果我们不陷入反射性的自欺欺人和慢性投机,DeSci 在开源科学里有一丝希望。

2025 年 10 月,OpenFold 联盟在 Apache 2.0 协议下发布了 OpenFold3。完全可训练,可商用,基于 30 万+实验确定的结构构建(不像 AlphaFold3,谷歌把它锁在学术专用限制下)。MIT 和 Recursion 联合推出的 Boltz-2 以快 1000 倍于物理方法的速度预测蛋白质结构和结合亲和力。Baker 实验室 12 月发布了 RFdiffusion3。ChEMBL 有 250 万个生物活性化合物,带完整 ADMET 图谱,任何有笔记本电脑的人都能免费用。过去制药公司要花数百万美元自建的基础设施,现在就躺在 GitHub 上,用的是宽松许可证,现在有五家制药公司正在通过联邦 OpenFold3 计划对他们的专有药物-蛋白质库进行联邦训练。加密推特上没人谈论这些,因为没有代币可以交易,而且我真的怀疑这些代码库的核心贡献者是否会对代币感到兴奋。

科研资金危机

2025 年,超过 7800 个 NIH 和 NSF 拨款被终止或暂停,超过 50 亿美元资金被冻结。NIH(美国国立卫生研究院,地球上最大的生物医学研究公共资助方,每年约 470 亿美元)预算持平,因为国会继续拨款,但政府仍然冻结了管线。新竞争性拨款从 2024 财年的 11659 个暴跌到 2025 财年的 6095 个,下降 48%。研究人员申请资助的成功率从 21%降到 13%,Fred Hutch 损失 5.08 亿美元,哈佛损失 9.45 亿美元。

资金真空是 DeSci 的推介有机会的原因——如果做对的话。2025 年 7 月,VitaDAO 资助的 Gero 与中外制药(罗氏子公司,市值约 1000 亿美元,不是 meme)签署了研究和许可协议,里程碑付款高达 2.5 亿美元。这是 DAO 资助的项目第一次产出真正的制药公司愿意出九位数估值的东西。这个流程在没有治理争斗或跑路的情况下完成,仍然是这个领域发生过的最重要的事情。

四年的永恒

今年有 15 到 20 个 AI 发现的药物进入 III 期,Rentosertib 的数据最早要到 2028 年才会公布,这意味着对这一切能否转化为在人体内有效的药物的真正判决还要好几年。无论是否存在代币,开源技术栈都会继续压缩成本,资金真空会继续推动研究人员转向任何愿意写支票的人。开源蛋白质折叠模型现在能以零授权成本达到 AlphaFold3 的水平,湿实验室验证成本不到 2000 美元,NIH 刚刚创下二十年来最低的拨款成功率。即使 AI 兑现其支持者承诺的一切,将药物开发时间线压缩一半,你看到的仍然是从发现到批准的 4 到 5 年周期,而这还是假设 III 期成功率真的提高的乐观情景。四年是一个永恒,在一个投资组合信念随着季度财报电话会议轮动的行业里,代币持有者把 6 个月的持有期当作无期徒刑。

无论有没有人买代币,发现和创新的成本每个季度都在变便宜。NIH 造成的资金真空也是个问题。在这两个原因之间,可能存在一个可行的版本,代币为特定临床试验提供资金,设定具体里程碑,治理权交给懂行的人。Gero/中外制药的交易是第一个证明,DAO 资助的项目能产出真正的制药公司愿意出九位数买的东西。抛开炒作不谈,我好奇是否有人会为真正的 DeSci 构建可防御的融资基础设施。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit2h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit2h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit3h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

How to Buy BIO

Welcome to HTX.com! We've made purchasing BIO Protocol (BIO) simple and convenient. Follow our step-by-step guide to embark on your crypto journey.Step 1: Create Your HTX AccountUse your email or phone number to sign up for a free account on HTX. Experience a hassle-free registration journey and unlock all features.Get My AccountStep 2: Go to Buy Crypto and Choose Your Payment MethodCredit/Debit Card: Use your Visa or Mastercard to buy BIO Protocol (BIO) instantly.Balance: Use funds from your HTX account balance to trade seamlessly.Third Parties: We've added popular payment methods such as Google Pay and Apple Pay to enhance convenience.P2P: Trade directly with other users on HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): We offer tailor-made services and competitive exchange rates for traders.Step 3: Store Your BIO Protocol (BIO)After purchasing your BIO Protocol (BIO), store it in your HTX account. Alternatively, you can send it elsewhere via blockchain transfer or use it to trade other cryptocurrencies.Step 4: Trade BIO Protocol (BIO)Easily trade BIO Protocol (BIO) on HTX's spot market. Simply access your account, select your trading pair, execute your trades, and monitor in real-time. We offer a user-friendly experience for both beginners and seasoned traders.

4.6k Total ViewsPublished 2025.01.02Updated 2026.06.02

How to Buy BIO

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BIO (BIO) are presented below.

活动图片