Meet the Nucleic Acid Insights Senior Editor: Floris Engelhardt

What inspired your journey into the nucleic acid therapeutics field?

FE: It is the ‘double power’ of nucleic acids that is so captivating: they store information (like text in a book) while also having a physical structure that performs a function (like the book as an object). This combination of carrying genetic code, performing complex cellular tasks, and interacting with the environment is unique. Already during my sophomore year in college, I vividly remember discussing with friends the potential of that dual nature for bioengineering. I started by studying DNA‑protein interactions and later moved into the field of DNA nanotechnology. Now, years later, I am still excited by every new functionality being uncovered. Nucleic acid therapeutics are an emerging blockbuster field in medicine, and I am lucky to be part of shaping it.

From your background and current role, what aspects of DNA nanotechnology and biomolecular systems excite you the most today?

FE: In my current role, I am no longer working in basic research on DNA origami or DNA nanotechnology, but I remain very close to it and keep up to date. For example, I loved seeing Anna Romanov’s recently published paper in Science on positioning antigens on the outer shell of a 3D DNA origami structure to interact with the immune system [1]Romanov A, Knappe GA, Ronsard L, et al. DNA origami vaccines program antigen‑focused germinal centers. Science 2026; 391, eadx6291.

. In that case, a three‑dimensional DNA structure is used as an architectural scaffold. This is a huge opportunity to create systems that steer the immune system in the right direction. The paper shows exactly that. Precise distances between the antigens optimize and enhance the immune response to this new vaccine modality. This works because the DNA scaffold itself is not immunogenic and can be reused for different types of vaccines. Anna and her co‑authors were able to test this approach to create a human B cell repertoire in an animal model, using HIV as a test system. It is very exciting to see these completely new types of use cases emerging from engineering nucleic acids.

In your view, what has been the most pivotal development in the DNA nanotechnology or nucleic acid engineering space as a whole in the past decade?

FE: The COVID‑19 pandemic was the most pivotal moment in the field of nucleic acids over the past decade. Not necessarily only because of the RNA vaccines, but specifically because of the scaling up of nucleic acid manufacturing and the process development that went into it. For example, plasmid DNA (pDNA) and mRNA production were scaled up and optimized because they were required for vaccine development. This created an infrastructure layer that moved nucleic acid‑based medicines from a small niche to the forefront, enabling them to treat millions of people.

For example, Moderna raised over $1.3 billion in 2020 to scale its manufacturing, and that money has since been invested in infrastructure [2]Stanton D. Moderna on $1.3bn manufacturing scale‑up of mRNA COVID vaccine. BioProcess Insider Aug 6, 2020. h. For us, as a startup, this is important because we can access an experienced talent pool, leverage CDMOs or work with partners with experience in nucleic acids in a way that simply did not exist 10 years ago.

What do you see as the next major scientific or technological leap that will push DNA‑based nanosystems into mainstream therapeutic or industrial use?

FE: We need to start seeing nucleic acid products more differentiated. If you read current market research reports for nucleic acids, they only mention pDNA, RNA, and oligonucleotides, and completely fail to reflect the product diversity. This has to change – the exploration and showcasing of novel biomaterials are key. For example, long single‑stranded DNA products open new markets for high‑efficiency insertion and non‑integrating in vivo therapies, respectively. But this modality fits neither the pDNA nor the oligonucleotide bucket.

The next push on commercialization requires manufacturing scalability. We need robust processes that are cheaper and yield more material, reducing the final product cost. That will require a clear assessment of whether new modalities and therapies address unmet needs and fit specific use cases.

The DNA‑based nanosystems industry has grown beyond a niche, and the focus is now on its specific strengths. Acknowledging that no single approach is universally applicable is crucial for this complex, growing market.

Moving forward, DNA‑based nanosystems must evolve from simple, single‑function systems to ones that leverage structural design and dynamic functionalities, mimicking the balanced, push‑and‑pull dynamics of biological evolution. For cell and gene therapies, that means that we grow beyond single targeting toward gene circuits and synthetic signaling systems. This means designing sensing systems that integrate environmental inputs using logic‑gate designs, which will unlock the field’s true potential.

In your view, what are the biggest obstacles the field must overcome to reach its full potential – whether scientific, regulatory, manufacturing, or delivery‑related – and how might these be addressed?

FE: We cannot focus solely on one obstacle; we need to maintain a holistic view. To accelerate this field, we must focus on three core areas: scientific/biological problems, regulatory challenges, and pricing/commercialization. The key lies in understanding the precise connection between these three areas, rather than addressing them in isolation.

A decade into the cell therapy commercial era, the market has matured through its initial challenges, yet it remains a young and rapidly expanding field. DNA‑based nanotechnologies, however, are still in their ‘teenager’ phase. Maturation will take another ten years, and while excitement is high, 2021–2023 taught us that simply throwing money at this space will not solve everything. Time, data, and clinical trials are essential, non‑negotiable steps.

The scientific hurdle is complex, often oversimplified as ‘solving delivery.’ As drug developers, we need to keep a more nuanced view, breaking delivery down into three critical barriers: reaching the correct organ or tissue, entering the cell and nucleus, and accessing the genome.

For tissue and cell delivery, viruses were a solid first step, but we now need non‑viral solutions. Targeted delivery solutions for nucleic acids, such as those being developed by MilliporeSigma and Samyang Biopharm, are key to achieving low toxicity and redosability. Once inside the cell, durability is the next challenge. For DNA‑based therapies, this means actively engineering passage into the nucleus, especially in non‑dividing cells where passive diffusion is not an option. Finally, accessing the genome involves navigating the high complexity of tools such as CRISPR, serine recombinases, and transposases – it is a massive categorization challenge to determine the best tool for the right job.

As these complex medicines come together, they hit regulatory and commercial roadblocks. Regulators face a confusing landscape: 20–30 different systems claiming to enable site‑specific genome editing, but with no clear rules for regulating them. Without these clear regulatory parameters, addressing the pricing narrative is impossible.

This brings us to the commercial challenge: what is the value of a cure? The existing insurance systems, built decades ago, struggle to understand how to price and deliver a one‑time cure. Ultimately, discomfort around advanced medicines blocks their adoption. Pricing uncertainty at the end of the pipeline slows early R&D. While founders can demonstrate patient impact, much larger forces must decide whether this truly represents a global shift in medicine.

Lastly, what motivated you to join the Nucleic Acid Insights Editorial Advisory Board?

FE: The future of this field is being shaped by the decisions we make right now. Many people are uncertain about nucleic acid therapies. The reason I was motivated to join Nucleic Acid Insights ties directly into this: we have a major communication challenge, a perception problem, surrounding new medical technologies.

We have to acknowledge the public’s deep‑seated skepticism toward the pharmaceutical industry, often driven by high pricing and a lack of transparency about how billions of dollars are spent.

When we try to communicate science, we typically fail by falling into one of two extremes. On one side, you have the often inaccessible, dense papers in journals like Nature or Science. On the other hand, you have oversimplified, high‑level summaries by general news outlets. This leaves a massive gap: either you get something only a specialist understands, or something so basic that experts dismiss it as inaccurate.

This is where Nucleic Acid Insights excels and why I believe in its mission. It focuses on that crucial middle ground: creating stories vital for translational work, written clearly enough for anyone in the field – regardless of their specific background – to truly grasp and apply the information. I believe this has a massive, transformative impact on the entire market. It enables us, as professionals, to understand each other’s work without introducing distortion or oversimplification, which is the foundational step toward building better products and earning the public’s trust. Moving forward, I am committed to seeing this platform continue to empower the entire community to communicate effectively and accelerate the development of life‑changing therapies.

References

1. Romanov A, Knappe GA, Ronsard L, et al. DNA origami vaccines program antigen‑focused germinal centers. Science 2026; 391, eadx6291. Crossref

2. Stanton D. Moderna on $1.3bn manufacturing scale‑up of mRNA COVID vaccine. BioProcess Insider Aug 6, 2020.   Link

Affiliation

Floris Engelhardt, Co‑Founder and CEO, Kano Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA, USA

AUTHORSHIP & CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Contributions: The named author takes responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, and has given their approval for this version to be published.

Acknowledgements: None.

Disclosure and potential conflicts of interest: Floris Engelhardt is Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Kano Therapeutics and holds equity in the company. Kano Therapeutics develops nucleic acid technologies relevant to topics discussed in this interview. Engelhardt is also a member of the Nucleic Acid Insights Editorial Advisory Board.

Funding declaration: The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

AI process statement: BioInsights used an AI tool (ChatGPT) to support non-creative editorial tasks such as the initial tidying of interview text material, including removing repetition and non-substantive dialogue from raw transcripts and correcting spelling and grammar. Human editors created the narrative, edited the content and approved the final version.

BioInsights encourages transparent, responsible, and verifiable use of AI as a supporting tool; never a creative substitute. All content ultimately reflects human expertise, ethical rigor, and scientific integrity. See our full AI policy statement for more information

ARTICLE & COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

Copyright: Published by Nucleic Acid Insights under Creative Commons License Deed CC BY NC ND 4.0 which allows anyone to copy, distribute, and transmit the article provided it is properly attributed in the manner specified below. No commercial use without permission.

Attribution: Copyright © 2026 Floris Engelhard. Published by Nucleic Acid Insights under Creative Commons License Deed CC BY NC ND 4.0.

Article source: This article was developed by BioInsights’ Editorial team using insights shared during an interview with the named author. It is a reflection of the discussion held that has been edited for clarity and flow. The named author reviewed and approved the final version prior to publication.

Interview held: Feb 4, 2026

Revised manuscript received: Mar 4, 2026.

Publication date: Mar 13, 2026.