In-utero stem cells for spina bifida & New cancer immunotherapy for solid tumors - News (Feb 27, 2026)

Let’s start with that striking medical update. Researchers have published early results from the first clinical trial testing an in‑utero stem‑cell therapy for spina bifida—specifically the most severe form, myelomeningocele, where the fetal spinal cord is exposed during pregnancy. In the CuRE trial led by surgeon Diana Farmer at the University of California, Davis, six pregnant women underwent fetal surgery around 24 to 25 weeks. During the operation, clinicians applied placenta‑derived stem cells—made from donated placentas—directly onto the exposed spinal cord. The headline is feasibility and safety: the team reported no surgical complications, and the infants were delivered at about 34 weeks without signs of infection, spinal fluid leakage, or tumor growth—an important concern whenever stem cells are involved. Another notable finding: all six newborns showed reversal of hindbrain herniation, a serious spina bifida‑linked complication where part of the brain shifts downward and disrupts fluid flow. Experts are urging caution, though, because six patients is still very small, and the key question—whether this improves long‑term function, including mobility—will take time. Standard fetal surgery can close the defect, but it doesn’t reverse damage already done to nerves. This stem‑cell approach is aimed at that missing piece, building on encouraging animal data, but for now it’s an early step, not a finished answer.

Staying with biomedical innovation, Yale scientists reported a major advance toward engineered immune‑cell therapies that can work against solid tumors—one of the toughest problems in cancer treatment. The team, led by geneticist Sidi Chen, engineered CAR‑NK cells, which use natural killer cells rather than T cells. CAR therapies have changed outcomes in some blood cancers, but solid tumors have been far harder, largely because immune cells struggle to penetrate tumors and often burn out in the hostile tumor environment. The Yale group systematically scanned tens of thousands of NK‑cell genes and landed on one standout: OR7A10. By adding OR7A10 to CAR‑NK cells, they saw markedly better tumor control in mouse models of breast, colon, and ovarian cancer. In one breast cancer model, every treated mouse had complete tumor elimination. They also tested the strategy in human NK cells in lab settings, checking not just tumor killing, but signs of exhaustion, metabolic strength, and resistance to immunosuppressive conditions. The promise here is also practical: CAR‑NK therapies may be easier to make from donor cells—an “off‑the‑shelf” angle that could lower costs and expand access if the results translate to people. The researchers say they’re expanding to brain and thyroid cancer targets, aiming for human trials in the next few years.

Now to public health in Africa, where two major infectious‑disease stories point in a hopeful direction. First, Kenya has begun administering lenacapavir—often shortened to LEN—a long‑acting HIV prevention injection that can protect someone for six months at a time. It’s being offered free to eligible people, making Kenya one of the early countries to roll it out. The injection is given just under the skin, typically in the lower abdomen or thigh, and will be administered twice a year at selected public facilities in priority counties. Health Minister Aden Duale launched the rollout in Nairobi and framed it as a practical new layer of protection, particularly for young people. Kenya has around 1.4 million people living with HIV, and officials say the highest burden is among 15‑ to 24‑year‑olds—an age group where convenience and confidentiality can strongly affect prevention choices. Authorities also say pregnant and breastfeeding mothers can use the drug safely, and that systems are in place to track side effects. On the logistics: Kenya received about 21,000 doses through an arrangement involving Gilead Sciences and the Global Fund, with more expected by April and additional doses set to come from the U.S. government to support early implementation. LEN was approved by the U.S. FDA in June 2025, and endorsed in WHO guidelines the following month. Second, South African scientists have launched an early-stage HIV vaccine trial called BRILLIANT 011, after a major funding shock forced a redesign. The original, larger plan relied on a multi‑year USAid grant that was cut after only a year, so the team rebuilt a smaller, “proudly South African” version, mainly funded by the Gates Foundation with emergency support from the South African Medical Research Council. The Phase 1 study will enroll about 20 healthy, HIV‑negative, low‑risk participants. Researchers are testing safety and whether two engineered immunogens—given together with an adjuvant—can trigger rare precursor immune cells that might eventually mature into broadly neutralising antibodies, the kind that can target many HIV strains despite the virus’s constant mutation. Participants also undergo leukapheresis after each dose so scientists can analyze huge numbers of white blood cells, using sequencing and flow cytometry to look for those rare signatures. This is not a near-term vaccine, but it’s foundational work—painstaking, expensive, and central to what an eventual vaccine might require.

Another infectious-disease development: European drug regulators have endorsed acoziborole, a simpler treatment for sleeping sickness—also known as human African trypanosomiasis. It’s a pill made by Sanofi, and the key selling point is simplicity: three pills taken at once in a single dose. That’s a big contrast with many current regimens, which can require a 10‑day course and hospital visits, and often spinal taps to determine whether the parasite has reached the nervous system. In a study of roughly 200 patients in Congo and Guinea, more than 95% were considered cured 18 months later. The pill is intended for people 12 and older and can be used for both early and advanced infections—potentially eliminating the need for those spinal taps. Sleeping sickness is transmitted by tsetse flies in rural sub‑Saharan Africa and can be fatal if untreated. Case counts have fallen dramatically over the past two decades, and advocates say the disease is on the brink of elimination. Sanofi has pledged to donate doses to the WHO so patients can receive treatment for free, and supporters hope the single‑dose design helps reach remote areas where follow‑up care is hardest.

Switching gears to technology and government power: a dispute between the U.S. Defense Department and AI company Anthropic is escalating into a high-stakes test of who gets to set the rules for military AI. According to reporting from the Associated Press, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued an ultimatum: allow Claude technology to be used by the military without restrictions by Friday, or risk losing the government contract. Officials also raised the possibility of labeling Anthropic a “supply chain risk,” and even floated using the Defense Production Act—better known as the DPA—to compel broader access. That’s significant because the DPA has historically been used for things like wartime manufacturing, pandemic supplies, and emergency logistics—not to override a private company’s safety limits on an AI model. Legal experts say using it that way would be unprecedented and likely trigger court fights. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has cited concerns about unchecked uses like fully autonomous weapons and mass surveillance. The Pentagon says it isn’t pursuing mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons without human involvement, but the standoff shows the deeper issue: even when both sides say they want safeguards, they may disagree on who defines them—and how binding they are.

To geopolitics now, starting with Iran and the United States. The two countries began a third round of indirect nuclear talks in Geneva, mediated again by Oman, as Washington assembles a sizable military presence in the Middle East. After several hours, the delegations paused to consult their governments, with Oman’s foreign minister saying “creative and positive ideas” were exchanged, and Iran describing the talks as intensive. Iran says it wants to avoid war but insists on its right to enrich uranium and refuses to broaden the negotiations to issues like missiles or regional proxies. Iranian officials warned that a conflict could pull the entire region into fighting, pointing to the number of U.S. bases across the Middle East. The talks come after negotiations collapsed following last summer’s Israel-Iran conflict and U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. The extent of damage to Iran’s program remains contested, and the IAEA has faced limits on access to bombed locations. Meanwhile, oil markets are watching closely—prices have been sensitive to any hint that shipping lanes like the Strait of Hormuz could be disrupted again.

Another security story is moving fast—and dangerously—between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistan’s defense minister has described the situation as an “open war,” after Afghanistan launched a large cross-border attack across multiple provinces, saying it was retaliation for Pakistani airstrikes days earlier. Pakistan says its earlier strikes killed militants in Afghanistan; Kabul says civilians were hit, including women and children. Pakistan then carried out new airstrikes early Friday, including strikes reported on Kabul and on Kandahar and Paktia, and border fighting that had paused resumed. The clash is unfolding amid a surge in militant violence inside Pakistan, which Islamabad largely blames on the Pakistani Taliban, the TTP—an organization allied with Afghanistan’s Taliban government. Afghanistan rejects the accusation that it shelters militants who attack Pakistan. Layered under all of this is the unresolved Durand Line border dispute and the strain from Pakistan’s mass deportation campaign, which has pushed large numbers of Afghans back across the border. International actors are urging de‑escalation, but at the moment the trajectory looks more like escalation than a return to last October’s ceasefire.

In business and connectivity news, India says it has entered the global 6G standard-setting process for the first time—an important shift from being largely a technology adopter to trying to shape the rules early. Communications Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia pointed to India’s rapid 5G buildout and said the country is now working with international bodies like the ITU and 3GPP on technical standards. A research proposal centered on “Ubiquitous Connectivity”—essentially seamless coverage with fewer dead zones—has been accepted into the international 6G standard-setting framework. India is also targeting a 10% share of global 6G patents, expanding its Bharat 6G Alliance, and building research corridors with partners in dozens of countries. Alongside the innovation push, Scindia also emphasized tighter digital safeguards, including SIM binding—linking SIMs to verified devices—and a proposed SIM-to-app binding requirement for major messaging platforms, aimed at curbing fraud and account misuse.

Finally, a story at the intersection of tech and mental health: a 20‑year‑old woman, identified in court as KGM, testified in Los Angeles that she became addicted to social media as a child—starting with YouTube at age six and Instagram at nine—and that by age 10 she was depressed and self-harming. KGM is the lead plaintiff in a major lawsuit against YouTube and Meta, alleging the companies intentionally designed addictive products that harm young people’s mental health. Her testimony described panic and fear of missing out when her phone was taken away, and she pointed to beauty filters as distorting her self-image. The case is the first trial in consolidated litigation involving more than 1,600 plaintiffs, including families and school districts. TikTok and Snap were originally part of KGM’s case but settled shortly before trial, with terms not public. Meta and YouTube deny wrongdoing, and the trial is expected to continue for weeks, with jurors set to hear from additional witnesses including family members and medical experts. Whatever the verdict, this is one of the clearest courtroom tests yet of a question regulators and parents have debated for years: where personal choice ends, and product design begins.