IntroductionExtremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF-EMFs) are ubiquitous in our daily life. They may have an impact not only on physical health but also on mental health.ObjectivesTo assess the impact of occupational exposure to the ELF-EMFs on sleep quality, depression, anxiety and stress among workers at the Tunisian Electricity and Gas Company (TEGC).MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study. The study population included two groups: an exposed group (EG), consisting of power plant employees, and a non-exposed group (NEG), consisting of administrative workers. Exposure to ELF-EMFs was assessed via spot measurements using a magnetometer. Sleep quality, depression, anxiety and stress were assessed by the French versions of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21).ResultsSeventy-seven participants in the EG and 88 participants in the NEG were included in the study. The median value of the ELF-EMFs was 5.86 μT at the power plant [min 0.1, max 40.34 μT]. According to the PSQI global score, 64.9% of the EG had poor sleep quality versus 29.5% of the NEG. Depression was registered in 24.7% of EG and in 3.4% of NEG. Anxiety was noted in 23.4% of the EG and in none of the NEG. Stress was found in 46.8% of the EG and none of the NEG. After multivariate analysis, ELF-EMF exposure was significantly associated with poor sleep quality and depression.ConclusionThe present study revealed that ELF-EMFs can affect sleep and mental health. Further studies are needed to explain the mechanism involved.
Mental health in the time of polycrisis: geopolitical determinants and modern psychiatry
Psychiatry is increasingly being practised in environments affected by geopolitical instabilities, including economic fragmentation, democratic backsliding, and widening inequities. The confluence of these phenomena contributes to what has been described as a contemporary polycrisis, encompassing synchronous disruptions that reinforce one another and threaten collective wellbeing. Nevertheless, psychiatric research and clinical work have generally remained oriented towards immediate determinants and risk factors, overlooking the macro-level political and institutional dynamics that can condition stressor exposure and mental health disparities. Amidst, interconnected crises, this paper advances geopsychiatry as a framework for understanding how distal geopolitical determinants translate into psychiatric vulnerabilities across communities and societies. Focussing on armed conflicts, climate change, and forced migration as emblematic domains of polycrisis, it highlights how these compounding phenomena are generating direct mental health burdens and may amplify harms via secondary pathways. Moreover, it contends that the psychiatric consequences of polycrisis are unlikely to be ameliorated through patient-centred interventions alone, but also require innovative approaches responsive to structural inequalities and material forces that transcend borders. In this context, work from geopsychiatry can offer important implications for modern psychiatry, highlighting a need for a more globally representative evidence base, potential clinical adaptations, and policy engagement that better attends to the geopolitical determinants of mental health.
The value of patient-focused drug development
Nature Medicine, Published online: 24 April 2026; doi:10.1038/s41591-026-04364-z
The value of patient-focused drug development
Cross-reactive anti-prophage antibodies and bacterial heteroresistance implicated in phage therapeutic failure
Nature Medicine, Published online: 24 April 2026; doi:10.1038/s41591-026-04301-0
A 22-year-old patient with cystic fibrosis and chronic, drug-resistant Bordetella bronchialis infection received compassionate-use phage therapy. Serum samples revealed that pre-existing antiphage immunity existed before treatment, indicating that future studies must evaluate antiphage immunity across the entire treatment regimen.
Targeted therapies plus radiotherapy for diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma: the randomized phase 2 BIOMEDE trial
Nature Medicine, Published online: 24 April 2026; doi:10.1038/s41591-026-04354-1
In a biomarker-driven trial evaluating radiotherapy with erlotinib, everolimus or dasatinib in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma, the primary endpoint of overall survival was not met, but features associated with long-term survival were defined, and everolimus emerged as a potential candidate for further testing.
From the discovery of GLP-1 to today’s diabetes/obesity therapy and beyond
Glucagon-like peptide-1 was discovered as an insulinotropic peptide from the gut during a search for candidates for the incretin effect. It turned out to also inhibit glucagon secretion and is now considered an important regulator of glucose metabolism. In further investigations of its physiological effects, it also inhibited gastrointestinal secretion and motility and inhibited appetite and food intake. Because of these effects, it was eventually demonstrated to be able to improve glucose control and beta cell function in T2DM patients and was even associated with weight loss.
Transcriptomic and phenotypic convergence of neurodevelopmental disorder risk genes in vitro and in vivo
Nature Neuroscience, Published online: 24 April 2026; doi:10.1038/s41593-026-02247-7
By studying 23 neurodevelopmental disorder genes across model systems and brain cell types, the authors uncovered shared downstream effects that converge on synaptic biology, epigenetic regulation and mitochondrial function.
Japanese Pharma Companies Turning to CDMOs Earlier in Product Life Cycle
Japanese pharmaceutical companies are engaging CDMOs earlier in the development cycle, as increasing complexity in peptide programs places greater strain on in-house capabilities, according to officials at Neuland Laboratories, which is attending CPHI Japan this week. The company says it has seen a notable shift in demand over the past 12–24 months, with more early-stage programs seeking external support.
This trend is being driven in part by growing activity from venture-backed biotech companies and spinouts emerging from large pharmaceutical R&D organizations, reports a Neuland spokesperson, who adds that as these programs advance into clinical development, demand for specialized CDMO capabilities is increasing.
Neuland has observed a rise in peptide-related engagements from Japanese companies, particularly at the preclinical and early clinical stages, where technical requirements are more demanding, notes Sharadsrikar Kotturi, PhD, CSO at Hyderabad, India-based Neuland Labs.
Peptide development presents several challenges compared with traditional small molecules, explains Kotturi. Analytical complexity remains a key issue, with structural characteristics making characterization, impurity detection, and purity assessment more difficult, he continues. Scaleup is also constrained by the availability and quality of protected amino acids, which can affect manufacturing timelines, cost, and overall success rates.
Regulatory expectations further add to the burden, points out Kotturi. Demonstrating purity, consistency, and process control to authorities such as Japan’s Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency requires extensive data, while shifting requirements introduce additional hurdles during development and approval. Simultaneously, pricing and regulatory pressures in Japan are increasing the operational load on drug developers, he states. Frequent drug price revisions are pushing companies to improve cost efficiency, reinforcing the case for outsourcing.
“The bottleneck isn’t discovery anymore. It’s execution,” says Kotturi. “In peptides, programs are running into challenges around analytical complexity, scaleup, and the availability of key raw materials such as protected amino acids.”
The post Japanese Pharma Companies Turning to CDMOs Earlier in Product Life Cycle appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.
Health-care AI is here. We don’t know if it actually helps patients.
I don’t need to tell you that AI is everywhere.
Or that it is being used, increasingly, in hospitals. Doctors are using AI to help them with notetaking. AI-based tools are trawling through patient records, flagging people who may require certain support or treatments. They are also used to interpret medical exam results and X-rays.
A growing number of studies suggest that many of these tools can deliver accurate results. But there’s a bigger question here: Does using them actually translate into better health outcomes for patients?
We don’t yet have a good answer.
That’s what Jenna Wiens, a computer scientist at the University of Michigan, and Anna Goldenberg of the University of Toronto, argue in a paper published in the journal Nature Medicine this week.
Wiens tells me she has spent years investigating how AI might benefit health care. For the first decade of her career she tried to pitch the technology to clinicians. Over the last few years, she says, it’s as though “a switch flipped.” Health-care providers not only appear much more interested in the promise of these technologies, they have also begun rapidly deploying them.
The problem is that many providers aren’t rigorously assessing how well they actually work.
Take “ambient AI” tools, for example. Also known as AI scribes, they “listen” to conversations between doctors and patients, then transcribe and summarize them. Multiple tools are available, and they are already being widely adopted by health-care providers.
A few months ago, a staffer at a major New York medical center who develops AI tools for doctors told me that, anecdotally, medics are “overjoyed” by the technology—it allows them to focus all their attention on their patients during appointments, and it saves them from a lot of time-consuming paperwork. Early studies support these anecdotes and suggest that the tools can reduce clinician burnout.
That’s all well and good. But what about patient health outcomes? “[Researchers] have evaluated provider or clinician and patient satisfaction, but not really how these tools are affecting clinical decision-making,” says Wiens. “We just don’t know.”
The same holds true for other AI-based technologies used in health-care settings. Some are used to predict patients’ health trajectories, others to recommend treatments. They are designed to make health care more effective and efficient.
But even a tool that is “accurate” won’t necessarily improve health outcomes. AI might speed up the interpretation of a chest X-ray, for example. But how much will a doctor rely on its analysis? How will that tool affect the way a doctor interacts with patients or recommends treatment? And ultimately: What will this mean for those patients?
The answers to those questions might vary between hospitals or departments and could depend on clinical workflows, says Wiens. They might also differ between doctors at various stages of their careers.
Take the AI scribes, as another example. Some research on AI use in education suggests that such tools can impact the way people cognitively process information. Could they affect the way a doctor processes a patient’s information? Will the tools affect the way medical students think about patient data in a way that impacts care? These questions need to be explored, says Wiens. “We like things that save us time, but we have to think about the unintended consequences of this,” she says.
In a study published in January 2025, Paige Nong at the University of Minnesota and her colleagues found that around 65% of US hospitals used AI-assisted predictive tools. Only two-thirds of those hospitals evaluated their accuracy. Even fewer assessed them for bias.
The number of hospitals using these tools has probably increased since then, says Wiens. Those hospitals, or entities other than the companies developing the tools, need to evaluate how much they help in specific settings. There’s a possibility that they could leave patients worse off, although it’s more likely that AI tools just aren’t as beneficial as health-care providers might assume they are, says Wiens.
“I do believe in the potential of AI to really improve clinical care,” says Wiens, who stresses that she doesn’t want to stop the adoption of AI tools in health care. She just wants more information about how they are affecting people. “I have to believe that in the future it’s not all AI or no AI,” she says. “It’s somewhere in between.”
This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.
Opinion: The local news crisis is also a public health crisis
The past four months have been a whirlwind for Pittsburgh’s journalism landscape. On Jan. 7, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Western Pennsylvania’s largest news organization, announced it would cease publication on May 3 after nearly 240 years. Then, on April 14, just over two weeks before that closure date, the Baltimore-based Venetoulis Institute for Local Journalism said it would acquire the paper’s assets and continue publication.
Like many Pittsburghers, I experienced the emotional rollercoaster of anger, disappointment, hope, and relief tied to these announcements. I grew up in the Pittsburgh area, where I vividly remember running barefoot down my driveway as a child to grab the Post-Gazette. Years later, I interned there as a health and science reporter and have since contributed as a freelancer.