Reading view
A simple blood test mismatch linked to kidney failure and death
STAT+: OpenEvidence raises $250 million, doubling its valuation
OpenEvidence, maker of a popular chatbot that helps doctors search clinical evidence, on Wednesday announced $250 million in new funding.
The new round led by Thrive Capital and DST Global values OpenEvidence at $12 billion, and the company has announced $735 million in funding in the last 12 months. OpenEvidence is free to use by any clinician with a national provider identifier number. The companyβs primary business model is advertising shown to clinicians.Β
Founded in 2022, OpenEvidence is one of the most prominent and best-funded companies from a wave of health artificial intelligence companies that emerged since the widespread availability of large language models. Reflecting on the eye-popping fundraising for health AI, a Silicon Valley Bank report released earlier in January raised an eyebrow at the ability of companies like OpenEvidence to deliver on their stratospheric valuations with advertising and software-as-a-service business models. βIt wonβt be a surprise to see them tap the value of the data theyβre already collectingβ to offer more services to pharma or other customers, the authors wrote.
Continue to STAT+ to read the full storyβ¦


Β© Adobe
Research progress in diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer with mismatch repair and microsatellite instability
Clin Transl Oncol. 2026 Jan 21. doi: 10.1007/s12094-025-04214-3. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
Pancreatic cancer (PC), predominantly pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, remains one of the most lethal malignancies, largely due to late diagnosis and intrinsic resistance to conventional therapies. In recent years, mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) have emerged as clinically actionable biomarkers in a small but distinct subset of PC, accounting for approximately 1-2% of cases. These tumors display unique molecular characteristics, including a high prevalence of wild-type KRAS and TP53, elevated tumor mutational burden, and recurrent kinase fusions, which together confer enhanced immunogenicity and increased sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In addition to their therapeutic relevance, dMMR/MSI-H status has important diagnostic implications for the identification of Lynch syndrome-associated pancreatic cancers, informing genetic counseling and familial risk assessment. This review summarizes current understanding of the molecular basis of mismatch repair deficiency and microsatellite instability in PC, evaluates available diagnostic approaches such as immunohistochemistry, polymerase chain reaction, and next-generation sequencing, and discusses the prognostic and predictive significance of dMMR/MSI-H status. Emerging clinical evidence supporting the use of ICIs in selected patients across neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and advanced disease settings is also reviewed, along with challenges related to assay discordance, tumor heterogeneity, and immunotherapy resistance. Finally, future directions are highlighted, emphasizing the need for standardized testing algorithms, integration of multi-omics and spatial profiling technologies, and prospective clinical studies to optimize precision treatment strategies for this rare but clinically meaningful subtype of pancreatic cancer.
PMID:41563663 | DOI:10.1007/s12094-025-04214-3
BRLA-DDI: A novel framework for drugβdrug interaction extraction
Publication date: April 2026
Source: Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Volume 174
Author(s): Zhu Yuan, Shuailiang Zhang, Zongjin Li, Huiyun Zhang, Huaqi Zhang, Yaxun Jia
Everyone wants AI sovereignty. No one can truly have it.
Governments plan to pour $1.3 trillion into AI infrastructure by 2030 to invest in βsovereign AI,β with the premise being that countries should be in control of their own AI capabilities. The funds include financing for domestic data centers, locally trained models, independent supply chains, and national talent pipelines. This is a response to real shocks: covid-era supply chain breakdowns, rising geopolitical tensions, and the war in Ukraine.Β Β
But the pursuit of absolute autonomy is running into reality. AI supply chains are irreducibly global: Chips are designed in the US and manufactured in East Asia; models are trained on data sets drawn from multiple countries; applications are deployed across dozens of jurisdictions.Β Β
If sovereignty is to remain meaningful, it must shift from a defensive model of self-reliance to a vision that emphasizes the concept of orchestration, balancing national autonomy with strategic partnership.Β
Why infrastructure-first strategies hit wallsΒ
A November survey by Accenture found that 62% of European organizations are now seeking sovereign AI solutions, driven primarily by geopolitical anxiety rather than technical necessity. That figure rises to 80% in Denmark and 72% in Germany. The European Union has appointed its first Commissioner for Tech Sovereignty.Β
This year, $475 billion is flowing into AI data centers globally. In the United States, AI data centers accounted for roughly one-fifth of GDP growth in the second quarter of 2025. But the obstacle for other nations hoping to follow suit isnβt just money. Itβs energy and physics. Global data center capacity is projected to hit 130 gigawatts by 2030, and for every $1 billion spent on these facilities, $125 million is needed for electricity networks. More than $750 billion in planned investment is already facing grid delays.Β
And itβs also talent. Researchers and entrepreneurs are mobile, drawn to ecosystems with access to capital, competitive wages, and rapid innovation cycles. Infrastructure alone wonβt attract or retain world-class talent.Β Β
What works: An orchestrated sovereignty
What nations need isnβt sovereignty through isolation but through specialization and orchestration. This means choosing which capabilities you build, which you pursue through partnership, and where you can genuinely lead in shaping the global AI landscape.Β
The most successful AI strategies donβt try to replicate Silicon Valley; they identify specific advantages and build partnerships around them.Β
Singapore offers a model. Rather than seeking to duplicate massive infrastructure, it invested in governance frameworks, digital-identity platforms, and applications of AI in logistics and finance, areas where it can realistically compete.Β
Israel shows a different path. Its strength lies in a dense network of startups and military-adjacent research institutions delivering outsize influence despite the countryβs small size.Β
South Korea is instructive too. While it has national champions like Samsung and Naver, these firms still partner with Microsoft and Nvidia on infrastructure. Thatβs deliberate collaboration reflecting strategic oversight, not dependence.Β Β
Even China, despite its scale and ambition, cannot secure full-stack autonomy. Its reliance on global research networks and on foreign lithography equipment, such as extreme ultraviolet systems needed to manufacture advanced chips and GPU architectures, shows the limits of techno-nationalism.Β
The pattern is clear: Nations that specialize and partner strategically can outperform those trying to do everything alone.Β
Three ways to align ambition with realityΒ
1.Β Measure added value, not inputs.Β Β
Sovereignty isnβt how many petaflops you own. Itβs how many lives you improve and how fast the economy grows. Real sovereignty is the ability to innovate in support of national priorities such as productivity, resilience, and sustainability while maintaining freedom to shape governance and standards.Β Β
Nations should track the use of AI in health care and monitor how the technologyβs adoption correlates with manufacturing productivity, patent citations, and international research collaborations. The goal is to ensure that AI ecosystems generate inclusive and lasting economic and social value.Β Β
2. Cultivate a strong AI innovation ecosystem.Β
Build infrastructure, but also build the ecosystem around it: research institutions, technical education, entrepreneurship support, and public-private talent development. Infrastructure without skilled talent and vibrant networks cannot deliver a lasting competitive advantage.Β Β Β
3. Build global partnerships. Β
Strategic partnerships enable nations to pool resources, lower infrastructure costs, and access complementary expertise. Singaporeβs work with global cloud providers and the EUβs collaborative research programs show how nations advance capabilities faster through partnership than through isolation. Rather than competing to set dominant standards, nations should collaborate on interoperable frameworks for transparency, safety, and accountability.Β Β
Whatβs at stakeΒ
Overinvesting in independence fragments markets and slows cross-border innovation, which is the foundation of AI progress. When strategies focus too narrowly on control, they sacrifice the agility needed to compete.Β
The cost of getting this wrong isnβt just wasted capitalβitβs a decade of falling behind. Nations that double down on infrastructure-first strategies risk ending up with expensive data centers running yesterdayβs models, while competitors that choose strategic partnerships iterate faster, attract better talent, and shape the standards that matter.Β
The winners will be those who define sovereignty not as separation, but as participation plus leadershipβchoosing who they depend on, where they build, and which global rules they shape. Strategic interdependence may feel less satisfying than independence, but itβs real, it is achievable, and it will separate the leaders from the followers over the next decade.Β
The age of intelligent systems demands intelligent strategiesβones that measure success not by infrastructure owned, but by problems solved. Nations that embrace this shift wonβt just participate in the AI economy; theyβll shape it. Thatβs sovereignty worth pursuing.Β
Cathy Li is head of the Centre for AI Excellence at the World Economic Forum.
Communication Strategies to Promote Patient Engagement in Telemedicine: Systematic Review
United multi-omics and machine learning refine regulatory T cell-defined hepatocellular carcinoma subtypes
iScience. 2025 Dec 3;29(1):114328. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2025.114328. eCollection 2026 Jan 16.
ABSTRACT
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is highly heterogeneous and aggressive, and the absence of precision individual treatment regimen enables repeated immune escape. Exploiting regulatory T cell (Treg) marker genes as key classifiers, we used 10 clustering algorithms to integrate the multi-omics HCC patient data and combined them with 10 machine learning (ML) algorithms to delineate molecular subtypes predictive of prognosis and immune response. We identified two cancer subtypes (CSs) that are associated with prognosis, with the second subtype (CS2) showing the most favorable prognostic outcomes. Subsequently, 9 key genes were screened for HCC model scoring, stratifying patients into low-risk (good prognosis, responsive to immunotherapy) and high-risk (poor outcome, not responsive to immunotherapy) groups. The high-risk group may be effective against the mTOR inhibitor AZD8055. Comprehensive multi-omics data and multiple ML algorithms offer key insights into HCC occurrence and evolution, with model scores guiding patient prognosis and treatment clinically.
PMID:41561382 | PMC:PMC12814435 | DOI:10.1016/j.isci.2025.114328