Countable Labs is building a novel PCR instrument that acts like digital PCR but runs inside a single tube.
Their method seems to isolate individual molecules in a gel, amplify them, and image the fluorescence directly in the tube to enable multiplexed detection.
Public details are limited, so people are looking through patents to understand the technical specifics.
They’re building a high-plex PCR approach that runs on standard qPCR and dPCR machines, already showing up to 15 targets in dPCR and a 7‑target qPCR prototype, with aims of roughly 50 and 40 targets respectively.
The key idea is to move fluorescent signal generation out of the genomic amplification and into a parallel isothermal secondary reaction; probe cleavage during PCR produces a cleaved tail that triggers separate signal‑generating chemistries, effectively acting like a barcode.
By decoupling signal chemistry from amplification and pooling fluorophores separately, the method could let developers multiplex many targets in a single reaction without needing specialized instrumentation.
Sarmal is a new company working on DNA sequencing and is pitching a technology called FLASH.
FLASH stands for Fluorescence Activation by Serial Hybridization and is described as involving a polymerase, but the explanation and figure are unclear.
There is a patent for the technology, and deeper details are gated behind a paid subscription paywall.
Protein sequencing is much harder than DNA sequencing and has fewer broad, foundational applications, making commercial success expensive and difficult.
Without big academic champions and large research projects to drive adoption, companies are forced into niche revenue paths that pull development away from a general-purpose sequencing platform.
There are realistic niche opportunities like biopharma QA/QC and sensitive biomarker detection, but turning protein sequencing into a widely used tool will require sustained funding, risk tolerance, and strong research adopters.
Roche’s Axelios can deliver genomes far cheaper than competitors — the headline is $150/genome, but a near‑Illumina quality simplex 30x genome may be around $30, with duplex offered for higher accuracy.
Initial 19‑hour prep times looked concerning, but an SBX‑Fast workflow suggests similar throughput with about a 3.5‑hour prep; final workflows (especially for simplex) aren’t public and prep time could still affect margins.
The system uses small disposable sensor chips that Roche claims can be reused (~20×), so chip cost likely only adds a modest amount (probably under ~$100) to each run rather than being a major cost driver.
Roche’s Axelios is priced competitively with Illumina — offering $150 per duplex genome and very low simplex read costs — but not so cheap that it will immediately displace Illumina, so adoption will be gradual.
Roche has clear advantages over newer rivals: it’s lower risk, more technically interesting, and cheaper for many counting/simplex applications, so it’s likely to outcompete companies like Ultima and Element.
Reusable chips and low per-run chip costs give Roche room to cut prices or offer big customer discounts later, but high switching costs and Illumina’s entrenched position mean market changes will be slow and uneven.
Illumina is targeting Q50 overall read quality by the end of 2027, and some kits will achieve Q70.
They’re releasing much higher-throughput options, including a 5 billion-read flow cell, a 1.5 billion-read 600-cycle kit, and upgrades pushing 10 billion reads to 14 billion (20-hour runs) and 25 billion to 35 billion reads.
Per-run prices will go up while cost per base goes down, and Complete Genomics has been sold.
There are two Axelios workflows being compared: SBX-D is a duplex, multi-day protocol around 19 hours, while SBX-Fast completes in roughly 3.5 hours.
Collected run data were used to directly compare SBX-D and SBX-Fast to show their relative throughput and performance differences.
The comparison highlights trade-offs between speed and duplex capability, so choosing a workflow depends on whether higher throughput or shorter turnaround time is more important.
A Cambridge-based solid-state nanopore company founded around 2021 recently closed a $736K seed round.
Their method hybridizes barcodes with bulky loops to RNA or DNA and threads them through a solid-state nanopore. Varying the loop patterns or spacing creates distinct labels that can be counted.
They’re targeting clinical counting applications such as point-of-care sepsis tests, early cancer detection, and minimal residual disease monitoring.
A new high-throughput sequencer delivers up to 5 billion reads per flowcell, running 2x150bp in about 36 hours with a planned upgrade to 2x300bp in the future.
It targets a $100 per-genome consumable cost while the instrument is priced at $689,000, putting it cheaper per genome than some competitors but more expensive than others.
The system is compact (mini-fridge size) and uses two flowcells with six lanes each, positioning it as a solid alternative to existing high-throughput platforms.
Clear images of Roche SBX chips from AGBT have surfaced and are being shared on Discord.
The photos use colored 'party' lighting and lack a neutral background or scale, which makes careful inspection harder.
A 2.54 mm pitch SIL header visible in the picture is being used as a scale to de-skew the image and estimate PCB dimensions, while fuller measurements and analysis are in a paid subscriber post.
Syndex Bio’s mcPCR can copy both DNA sequence and methylation marks during amplification, effectively enabling ‘PCR for methylation’. This should improve testing of small or non‑invasive oncology samples for earlier detection and recurrence monitoring.
Ultima Genomics launched a cheaper (~$850K) second instrument (ug200) that removes a separate ePCR step and doubles output per wafer, boosting throughput and lowering cost. It still appears bead‑based on unpatterned wafers, which suggests there’s further density headroom if they optimize wafer/flowcell design.
The bigger risk for Ultima is commercial: they need to find enough customers to absorb the massive throughput and drive the hyper‑elastic growth required for the business to survive. Capacity and performance may be strong, but market adoption is the key bottleneck.
Protein sequencing is becoming a growing startup space, with many companies now working to make protein readouts practical.
Two main technical routes dominate—optical methods and nanopore-based sequencing—while a smaller set of firms pursue other novel approaches, and multiple companies are active in each category.
An updated directory of DNA sequencing companies is maintained, and contributors are invited to share additional firms to keep the list current.
Roche’s new Axelios single-molecule sequencer appears to be a real engineering breakthrough that can match or beat Illumina on key metrics like read length, speed, throughput, and accuracy.
Because Roche is large, well-funded, and running global pilots, it can aggressively compete on price and scale, potentially grabbing significant market share if reuse and pricing work out.
Significant uncertainty remains due to Roche’s mixed history, pricing and purchasing-cycle risks, and execution challenges, so excellent technology doesn’t guarantee immediate market disruption.
Informal polls on Discord and LinkedIn had low response and are hard to interpret, but they did identify a small group of respondents who actually have purchasing influence.
Even though Roche's Axelios pricing isn't much better than Illumina's, the product still appears compelling to a subset of potential buyers.
Using rough assumptions about market size (>2000 instruments) and the poll results, a back‑of‑the‑envelope projection yields about 250 Axelios units in the first year, but that number relies on several optimistic assumptions and substantial uncertainty.
You can bound Roche's first-year instrument shipments by comparing to historical first-year shipments of similar sequencing platforms.
Historical examples vary a lot — from roughly 20 units up to about 500 units in their first year — so Roche could plausibly fall anywhere in that range.
Producing a useful estimate will require more data and clear assumptions about market demand, pricing, and manufacturing capacity.
Japan has deep expertise and built many key components for sequencing — from contributions to the Human Genome Project to ISFET sensing and imaging sensors — yet it has produced almost no homegrown DNA or protein sequencing companies.
Possible reasons include a lack of strong domestic genome centers and expert customers, structural problems with the startup ecosystem, and past institutional missteps that discouraged local product development.
The shift toward clinical, sample-to-answer sequencing and the still-open field of protein sequencing are clear opportunities Japan could exploit with its research and manufacturing strengths, and funding startups would build domestic talent and capability even if many ventures fail.
Nano Diagnostics started around 2010 as Biodirection and originally pursued a nanowire-based approach aimed at point-of-care concussion detection.
Improved biomarkers and competitors like Abbott now offer fast immunoassay TBI tests (cleared in 2023), making the concussion diagnostics market tougher for NanoDx.
Recent patents and company signals suggest NanoDx has moved away from its original nanowire focus and is emphasizing SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics, reflecting a broader industry shift away from nanowire approaches.
Acorn Genetics says it is building solid-state nanopore DNA sequencing technology.
Solid-state nanopore sequencing has been extremely hard historically, with no clear proof-of-concept despite decades of work and hundreds of millions spent.
The company raised about $2M to build an alpha and has roadmap timing for a beta around now, but the small funding and the field’s challenges make the timeline and prospects uncertain.
PacBio sold its short-read sequencing assets to Illumina for about $50M, which is far less than what it paid acquiring Omniome and Apton.
PacBio’s short-read products never gained traction and Onso sales were minimal, and recent layoffs suggest the development teams are largely gone.
The deal only buys PacBio roughly six months of additional runway, and Illumina is likely to hold the IP rather than immediately use it to build new platforms.
AITBioTech is selling a small DNA sequencer (ABSEQ) with iSeq/MiSeq-level specs, but it appears to be a rebranded DNBSeq device using the same luminescence-based chemistry.
Their qPCR system also looks like an OEM product from Taiwanese manufacturers, indicating the company rebrands existing instruments rather than building wholly new hardware.
Rebranding and OEM sourcing is common in the sequencing industry, and while OEMs could eventually offer customized, integrated instruments for clients, that kind of tailored integration probably isn’t imminent.
Several companies now offer compact, high‑throughput nanopore sequencers (Qitan Q‑P2, MGI CycloneSeq/G100‑ER, PolySeq X2, Meilitech), but most models are currently sold mainly in China or Russia and are hard to obtain elsewhere.
MGI's CycloneSeq is the most likely near‑term global alternative, yet it faces legal/IP disputes, possible sales restrictions and tariffs, unclear pricing, and reports of lower data quality compared with established platforms.
The growing number of competitors shows nanopore know‑how isn't exclusive to one company, so competing platforms will probably improve and become more widely available over time.
10X presented at JPM after releasing preliminary full‑year results, and Serge’s clear, confident presentation showed a strong command of the company’s technology and market which made the talk engaging.
They emphasized potential clinical growth; if clinical revenue expands strongly it would be a positive development and could push the business toward a mostly clinical market like Illumina.
Oncology was flagged as an important clinical area of focus.
Build sample-to-answer DNA and protein sequencers for hypothesis-free diagnostics so clinics can detect known and novel pathogens or biomarkers without guessing, ideally at qPCR-like cost.
Japan is well positioned to lead this effort because it has strong manufacturing and technical capabilities but currently lacks domestic DNA or protein sequencing platform companies, creating a strategic market opportunity.
Use an SBIR-style, commercialization-first program to fund and spin out startups, prioritize simplified sample prep and advanced sequencing (long reads, protein), and engage investors early to scale devices for global clinical use.
Illumina’s clinical business is strengthening while overall revenue is flat-to-down, and the company will likely report modest results without launching new sequencing instruments.
Oxford Nanopore probably won’t surprise before the new CEO starts in March, since recent gains looked driven by financial restructuring and price increases rather than clear instrument growth.
PacBio has made technical progress and landed some population sequencing wins, but recent quarterly declines and doubts about reaching profitability by 2027 make acquisition rumors understandable yet unlikely.
The full-year trading update largely matched the first-half results and showed no major surprises.
Revenue grew about 12% from H1 to H2, but some of that appears seasonal or tied to one-off pricing and financing, so underlying growth is likely around that level.
Cash on hand is down to £302 million, which at the current burn rate gives roughly a three-year runway.
Many commercial systems fully automate sample-to-answer molecular testing and produce results in roughly 13–120 minutes.
The market spans traditional qPCR platforms and newer isothermal or novel technologies, offered by a wide range of companies.
Sequencing still needs extensive prep and trained staff, so automated sample-to-answer molecular platforms are more practical for rapid diagnostics, and several novel approaches are worth watching.