The ENDO 2026 study, which analyzed data from 204 countries and territories, found that the global burden of heart disease is increasingly driven by rising obesity rates, causing cardiovascular disease (CVD) to occur at younger ages, according to researchers presenting Monday at the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting in Chicago.

The study reports that heart disease rates now peak among people aged 50 to 54, a shift from the traditional pattern where the highest rates were seen in much older adults.

South Asia emerged as the fastest-growing hotspot for obesity-linked heart disease, with age-standardized rates and trends increasing more than three times faster than global averages, the study showed. Investigators described obesity as a factor “rewriting” global heart disease trends by shifting CVD from a predominantly late-life condition to one increasingly affecting people in mid-life. The Endocrine Society characterized this trend as a significant emerging global health crisis, urging policy responses that explicitly target obesity to reduce premature cardiovascular disease.

A 2024 global assessment titled “The Silent Surge: Obesity Driving a Global Cardiovascular Crisis” estimated that more than 1 billion people worldwide currently live with obesity, nearly doubling the figure since 1990. When overweight individuals are included, nearly 2.5 billion adults are affected. The report estimates that high body mass index (BMI) contributes to approximately 1.9 million cardiovascular deaths annually. The World Heart Federation has stated that obesity is a key risk factor for cardiovascular disease and noted that obesity rates have been steadily increasing over the past three decades across nearly all regions.

Data from U.S. sources illustrate the shift toward earlier heart disease onset. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s WONDER database shows that obesity-related ischemic heart disease deaths increased by about 180% between 1999 and 2020, with the highest mortality rates observed among middle-aged adults aged 55 to 64. These trends highlight the growing impact of obesity on cardiovascular health in working-age populations. Clinical research from a 12-year cohort study at Johns Hopkins University found that adults with a BMI of 35 or higher and elevated high-sensitivity troponin—a marker of subclinical heart muscle injury—were nine times more likely to develop heart failure, underscoring the cardiovascular risks faced by younger, metabolically healthy adults with obesity.

The mechanisms by which obesity drives premature heart disease include its direct promotion of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, sleep apnea, and systemic inflammation, according to a scientific statement from the American Heart Association (AHA). A large Mendelian randomization and epidemiologic study published in the European Heart Journal found that each 5 kg/m² increase in BMI raises the risk of heart failure by about 41% and coronary heart disease by 15%, providing strong evidence of a causal relationship. Furthermore, obesity itself, even without classic risk factors, is linked to myocardial injury, as elevated troponin levels in obese adults predict future heart failure, supporting the concept of obesity cardiomyopathy.

Global burden analyses indicate that from 1990 to 2023, high BMI contributed to more than a twofold increase in deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) from cardiovascular diseases, particularly ischemic heart disease, hypertensive heart disease, ischemic stroke, and intracranial hemorrhage. The “Silent Surge” report emphasized that high BMI is now responsible for an estimated 1.9 million cardiovascular deaths annually, making obesity a leading modifiable driver of global cardiovascular mortality. The World Heart Federation has highlighted that in many regions, more people now live with obesity than with underweight, underscoring obesity’s significance as a public health problem worldwide.

The shift of peak heart disease burden into the early 50s is further supported by global data showing that while ischemic heart disease deaths remain highest after age 70, DALYs from high-BMI-related cardiovascular disease peak between ages 50 and 69, indicating maximal loss of healthy life in mid-life. Analyses also reveal that the risk of premature cardiovascular mortality associated with overweight and obesity begins in early adulthood, with excess risk especially pronounced among those who develop obesity at younger ages.

South Asia’s rapid increase in obesity-linked heart disease is attributed to factors including urbanization, dietary shifts toward ultra-processed foods, and rising rates of obesity and diabetes, according to global cardiovascular policy statements. The World Heart Federation and allied organizations note that South Asian populations often experience cardiovascular disease at younger ages and at lower BMI thresholds than other populations, amplifying the impact of the current obesity surge on premature cardiovascular disease. Equity-focused interventions are urgently needed in lower- and lower-middle-income regions, including South Asia, where the cardiometabolic transition is occurring rapidly.

Policy responses recommended by international health organizations include adopting national obesity action plans aligned with the World Health Organization’s 2022 “Acceleration Plan to STOP Obesity,” which sets clear targets through 2030 and calls for robust accountability mechanisms. The American Heart Association classifies obesity as a major, independent, and modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease and advocates for integrated prevention and treatment strategies across the life course. Global frameworks such as the WHO Acceleration Plan to Stop Obesity, the Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases, and the Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health explicitly link obesity control to reducing cardiovascular disease burden. Recommended interventions include taxing sugary drinks, restricting marketing of unhealthy foods to children, improving front-of-pack nutrition labeling, and redesigning urban environments to promote physical activity.

The study presented at the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting in Chicago in June 2026 reported that among people with type 2 diabetes, those taking semaglutide experienced 794 bone fractures compared with 1,045 fractures in a control group using other anti-obesity medications. This corresponds to a 15% lower fracture risk linked to semaglutide use, according to a press release from the Endocrine Society. The semaglutide group also showed a greater reduction in body mass index (BMI) than the comparator group, officials said.

Among people with type 2 diabetes, those taking semaglutide experienced 794 bone fractures compared with 1,045 fractures in a control group using other anti-obesity medications.

The research, presented as part of ENDO 2026, focused on fracture incidence rather than direct measures of bone mineral density or bone quality. Details about the study’s design were limited in the press release, and the findings do not establish causation but suggest a potential association between semaglutide use and reduced fracture risk relative to other weight-loss drugs, the society noted.

Additional studies provide a mixed picture of semaglutide’s effects on bone health. A retrospective cohort study published earlier in 2026 found that adults with obesity using semaglutide had a 26% lower fracture risk compared with those undergoing sleeve gastrectomy, with a hazard ratio of 0.74 and a 95% confidence interval of 0.56 to 0.98. The authors of that study described the result as indicating a possible bone-protective effect of semaglutide relative to surgical weight-loss treatments.

Conversely, a 2024 randomized trial involving adults at increased fracture risk found that semaglutide did not increase bone formation and was associated with higher bone resorption, a process that may be explained by weight loss, according to the study’s authors. That trial also reported decreases in lumbar spine and total hip areal bone mineral density after 52 weeks in the semaglutide group compared with placebo.

Weight loss itself is increasingly recognized as a factor that can compromise skeletal integrity. A 2025 review in Nature Reviews Endocrinology highlighted that rapid or sustained weight loss can reduce bone mineral density and increase fracture risk. Supporting this, a 2025 advance article in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (JCEM) reported that use of semaglutide or tirzepatide was associated with greater annualized total-hip bone loss in patients without diabetes. That study found a significant association between weight loss and bone loss at the total hip and femoral neck.

Further, a 2024-2025 Endocrine Society abstract documented significant declines in lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip bone mineral density among patients receiving semaglutide or tirzepatide, with total-hip decline linked to the amount of weight lost.

Not all research shows a fracture risk reduction with GLP-1 receptor agonists like semaglutide. A recent JCEM cohort study of older adults with type 2 diabetes reported an 11% increased fracture risk among new GLP-1 receptor agonist users compared with comparator therapies, with a hazard ratio of 1.11 and a 95% confidence interval of 1.01 to 1.21. In that study, GLP-1 receptor agonist use was associated with higher fracture risk than dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors but not clearly higher than sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors. Another study in people with obesity but without diabetes found that GLP-1 receptor agonists were linked to increased fracture risk, with fracture incidence rates of 3.05% in exposed patients versus 2.61% in unexposed patients. That study also reported a stronger fracture risk signal in individuals with a body mass index over 40 and among older age groups.

The Endocrine Society’s June 2026 report compared semaglutide specifically with other anti-obesity medications rather than placebo. Prior research indicates that the effects of semaglutide and other GLP-1 receptor agonists on bone may vary depending on diabetes status, the amount of weight loss, and the comparator treatment used. Some data suggest that semaglutide may have a relatively favorable profile compared with bariatric surgery, which is known to negatively affect bone health. However, other datasets show either no clear bone benefit or a small increase in fracture risk, reflecting inconsistency in the literature.

The findings presented at ENDO 2026 add to a complex body of evidence regarding semaglutide’s impact on bone health. The reported 15% fracture risk reduction and fracture count differences provide important data points but do not confirm a protective effect on bone. Further research, including peer-reviewed studies with detailed methodology and longer follow-up, will be necessary to clarify semaglutide’s role in skeletal health among people with type 2 diabetes and obesity.

The study, conducted by researchers at the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University in Zhejiang, China, analyzed individuals with established type 2 diabetes to assess the relationship between daytime nap duration and the risk of metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). According to lead author Xuejiang Gu, M.D., Ph.D., executive director of the hospital’s Endocrinology Department, naps longer than 30 minutes were independently linked to a higher likelihood of MASLD among people with type 2 diabetes, regardless of nighttime sleep quality. “Long naps appear to independently increase the likelihood of MASLD in people with type 2 diabetes,” Gu said during the presentation at ENDO 2026, held June 3–6 in Chicago.

“Naps longer than 30 minutes were independently linked to a higher likelihood of MASLD among people with type 2 diabetes, regardless of nighttime sleep quality.”

The association between prolonged daytime napping and fatty liver disease risk persisted even after adjusting for the quality of nocturnal sleep, suggesting that nap duration itself is a significant factor. Participants who napped for less than 30 minutes did not show a similar increased risk, according to the data presented. Moreover, the combination of poor nighttime sleep and long daytime naps more than tripled the risk of MASLD compared with individuals without these sleep disturbances, underscoring the combined impact of sleep quantity and quality on liver health in this population.

This finding aligns with previous research linking adverse sleep behaviors to metabolic fatty liver disease. Prior Endocrine Society reports have identified daytime napping exceeding 30 minutes, late bedtimes, and snoring as risk factors for metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). One large Chinese cohort study cited by the researchers found that these sleep behaviors were associated with increased odds of MAFLD, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.17 for napping longer than 30 minutes. The presence of both prolonged daytime napping and disturbed nighttime sleep was associated with more than twice the odds of MAFLD, even after controlling for obesity and other confounders.

Supporting evidence from broader populations further substantiates the link between long daytime naps and fatty liver disease. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 observational studies involving 48,248 participants reported that daytime napping was associated with a higher incidence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and MAFLD, with a pooled odds ratio of 1.13. Within that analysis, long naps were significantly associated with increased disease risk (odds ratio 1.21), while short naps showed no significant effect. Another meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization study found that naps exceeding 30 minutes were associated with a 32% increased risk of NAFLD compared with non-nappers. Observational data from Guangdong Province, China, similarly demonstrated that daytime napping of 60 minutes or more was positively associated with NAFLD, with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.21.

The overlap between diabetes, metabolic risk, and napping behavior is also well documented. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 40 studies found habitual daytime napping was linked to increased diabetes risk, with an odds ratio of 1.20, and poor glycemic control in people with diabetes, with an odds ratio of 2.05. Naps lasting less than 30 minutes were not associated with diabetes risk, whereas naps of 30 to 60 minutes and longer than 60 minutes were linked to progressively higher risks. A study published in Frontiers in Endocrinology reported that napping longer than 30 minutes increased type 2 diabetes risk by 8 to 21%, with combined non-optimal nighttime sleep and napping further elevating risk. A Spanish cohort of older adults at high cardiovascular risk found that longer daytime napping was associated with higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes and increased adiposity, reinforcing the connection between prolonged napping and adverse metabolic profiles.

Given that MASLD and fatty liver disease are closely tied to insulin resistance and metabolic dysfunction, these findings provide indirect support for the ENDO 2026 data indicating that people with type 2 diabetes who nap longer than 30 minutes are particularly vulnerable to fatty liver disease. The Endocrine Society has previously emphasized that poor sleep behaviors, including prolonged daytime napping, are risk factors for fatty liver disease. Their prior analyses showed that patients exhibiting both prolonged naps and nighttime sleep disturbances had more than double the odds of metabolic-associated fatty liver disease, even after adjusting for obesity and other variables.

The researchers and Endocrine Society officials have highlighted that sleep and napping patterns may serve as actionable risk markers in clinical practice. Routine assessment of nap duration and nighttime sleep quality could help identify patients with type 2 diabetes at higher risk for fatty liver disease. The investigators suggested that modifying nap habits may represent a simple behavioral strategy to reduce MASLD risk in this population.

The ENDO 2026 study adds to a growing body of evidence on the role of sleep behaviors in metabolic health, particularly among people with type 2 diabetes. Future research may further elucidate the mechanisms linking prolonged daytime napping and fatty liver disease, as well as the potential benefits of targeted sleep interventions in this high-risk group.

Earlier DGHS data cited by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) indicated 70,936 suspected cases and 585 deaths since mid-March, with 9,049 lab-confirmed infections and 90 confirmed fatalities. United Nations situation reports from May 5 noted 42,979 suspected cases, 5,729 lab-confirmed cases, and at least 263 suspected and 54 confirmed deaths, acknowledging that mortality is likely underreported due to diagnostic constraints and incomplete reporting, especially in remote areas.

According to the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), the outbreak began in mid-March 2026 and has since resulted in at least 652 child deaths, including 560 with measles-like symptoms and 92 laboratory-confirmed cases, as reported by Prothom Alo on May 12.

Health officials have identified children under five as the most affected group, with a particular concentration among those aged 6 to 59 months. Early outbreak data reported by Al Jazeera showed 6,476 suspected cases and 826 confirmed pediatric cases in that age range during the initial weeks, with 16 confirmed deaths. The outbreak has been concentrated in densely populated urban and peri-urban districts, with the government designating approximately 30 worst-affected areas for priority vaccination. DGHS figures shared with CIDRAP revealed that 56,886 patients required hospitalization, placing significant strain on pediatric and infectious disease services; of those hospitalized, 93%—or 52,841 patients—had been discharged as recovered. UN reports described the outbreak as intensifying pressure on the health system, particularly in facilities serving vulnerable and hard-to-reach populations.

In response, Bangladesh’s government launched a nationwide emergency mass vaccination campaign on April 5, 2026, targeting children aged 6 to 59 months. The campaign aimed to vaccinate between 18 and 20 million children, according to government statements and NPR reporting. UNICEF’s country representative, Rana Flowers, told Al Jazeera that the campaign had successfully reached 18 million children within roughly the first month, with ongoing efforts to identify and immunize those missed initially. NPR coverage confirmed that officials had met their initial vaccination target and were now focusing on locating unvaccinated children. CIDRAP reported that while the campaign intended to administer two doses of measles-containing vaccine for durable immunity, most children had received only the first dose to date, leaving a gap in full protection.

WHO and UNICEF have provided emergency support since early April, including vaccine supplies, cold-chain logistics, and technical guidance for the campaign’s rollout. WHO’s disease outbreak guidance for measles emphasizes rapid response teams, intensive surveillance in border areas, and maintaining at least 95% coverage with two doses of measles vaccine. It also recommends post-exposure prophylaxis for health workers and other high-risk groups and ensuring sufficient stocks of measles-rubella (MR) or measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccines and injection supplies. UNICEF representatives confirmed that emergency measles-rubella vaccination was conducted in high-risk settings, such as camps for displaced populations.

Bangladesh’s health minister announced the cancellation of Eid holidays for medical staff treating measles patients and confirmed the ongoing nationwide vaccination drive to curb the outbreak. DGHS briefings reported by Prothom Alo detailed the increasing death toll and the government’s intensified response. UN situation reports emphasized that the official death figures likely underestimate the true mortality burden due to underreporting and diagnostic limitations.

Health authorities and international agencies have expressed concern about the risk of regional spread, given the high transmissibility of measles and the large number of suspected cases. WHO guidance stresses strengthening epidemiological surveillance in high-traffic border areas and among mobile populations to detect and contain cross-border transmission. UN reports describe the outbreak as a public health emergency with regional implications, noting that under-vaccinated communities and displacement in border districts increase the risk of exported cases. International media have highlighted the crisis’s potential to fuel renewed measles transmission in South Asia, calling attention to low global awareness. WHO recommends ensuring vaccination access for international travelers, transport workers, and displaced populations along travel and migration corridors.

Officials and experts attribute the outbreak to immunity gaps created by disruptions in routine immunization services, including those caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, and pockets of low measles vaccine coverage. Overcrowding, poverty, and malnutrition in some communities have also increased children’s vulnerability to severe disease and complications, contributing to the high death toll, according to UN and media analyses. WHO advises sustaining at least 95% two-dose measles vaccine coverage nationwide after the emergency phase, combined with strengthened case-based surveillance and rapid response teams, to prevent measles from becoming endemic again. Health officials and international partners emphasize that continued emergency vaccination, enhanced surveillance, and targeted outreach to hard-to-reach and border populations will be necessary to reduce mortality, close immunity gaps, and mitigate the risk of ongoing regional spread.

CASGEVY (exagamglogene autotemcel) is approved for patients 12 years and older with severe sickle cell disease (SCD) who experience recurrent vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs), the FDA said in its December 8 announcement. The therapy is the first to use CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing to treat any human disease in the United States, marking a regulatory milestone, officials said. On the same day, the FDA also authorized Lyfgenia (lovotibeglogene autotemcel), a lentiviral vector gene-addition therapy for patients 12 and older with SCD and a history of vaso-occlusive events (VOEs). Together, these are the first cell-based gene therapies approved for sickle cell disease in the U.S., according to the agency.

Clinical trial data submitted to the FDA showed promising results. Yale Medicine summarized findings that 28 of 32 patients (88%) treated with CASGEVY experienced no painful vaso-occlusive episodes for six to 18 months following infusion.

CASGEVY is an autologous ex vivo gene-edited cell therapy, meaning patients’ own hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells are collected, edited in the laboratory to disrupt the erythroid-specific enhancer of the BCL11A gene, and then reinfused after myeloablative conditioning chemotherapy, the FDA explained. This editing reactivates fetal hemoglobin (HbF) production, which compensates for defective adult sickle hemoglobin (HbS), reducing red blood cell sickling and hemolysis that cause painful vaso-occlusive episodes. Unlike Lyfgenia, which adds a modified β-globin gene via a lentiviral vector, CASGEVY’s approach involves precise gene editing of regulatory DNA, officials noted.

Peer-reviewed analyses reported durable induction of fetal hemoglobin and marked reductions or elimination of VOCs in the majority of participants. FDA reviewers determined that the benefit-risk profile is favorable for eligible patients given the high morbidity and mortality associated with severe SCD and the observed clinical improvements.

The FDA’s approval did not list any formal contraindications for CASGEVY. Common adverse effects related to the treatment process, including the conditioning regimen, include mouth sores, nausea, musculoskeletal and abdominal pain, vomiting, headache, pruritus, febrile neutropenia, and decreased appetite, according to clinical trial safety data. The therapies require administration at specialized centers with expertise in hematopoietic cell transplantation, reflecting the complexity and intensity of the treatment protocols, the FDA and industry sources said.

The Sickle Cell Disease Association of America (SCDAA) welcomed the approvals, calling them the first treatments of their kind for individuals with SCD in the United States. The association reported that gene therapy availability was expected to begin in early 2024. Vertex Pharmaceuticals and CRISPR Therapeutics, developers of CASGEVY, announced plans to establish a network of authorized U.S. treatment centers, initially including nine locations, to deliver the therapy under controlled conditions. Bluebird bio, maker of Lyfgenia, is pursuing similar implementation strategies.

Cost considerations remain significant. SCDAA cited estimated list prices of approximately $2.2 million for CASGEVY and $3.1 million for Lyfgenia, highlighting challenges related to reimbursement and access. Analysts have noted that despite the high upfront costs, these one-time therapies may offer long-term savings by reducing hospitalizations and chronic care needs associated with severe sickle cell disease.

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) described the FDA’s decision as opening a “new frontier” in SCD treatment by approving two gene therapies—one using gene editing and the other gene addition. Scientific reviews characterize the dual approvals as a “dual breakthrough” that expands curative-intent options beyond existing disease-modifying treatments such as hydroxyurea, L-glutamine, voxelotor, and crizanlizumab, none of which fully prevent progression to chronic organ damage.

Experts emphasize that CASGEVY’s approval establishes a regulatory precedent for future CRISPR-based medicines targeting other diseases, transitioning genome editing from experimental trials into routine clinical care in U.S. hospitals. However, advocacy groups and researchers also underscore the need for equitable access, long-term safety monitoring, and infrastructure development to ensure that people with sickle cell disease—who are disproportionately from historically marginalized communities—can benefit from these advances.

The World Health Organization continues to classify tuberculosis, including multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) forms, as a global health crisis, but it has not issued a new global health emergency declaration specifically tied to drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) strains linked to U.S. travelers, officials confirmed. WHO’s ongoing response to DR-TB is framed through sustained strategies such as the End TB Strategy and targeted crisis management rather than a single-event emergency alert, according to WHO and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) sources.

WHO’s most recent major action on DR-TB was the release of updated consolidated guidelines on April 15, 2025, which introduced new treatment recommendations for MDR and rifampin-resistant TB, including shorter, all-oral regimens designed to improve patient outcomes and reduce treatment duration.

Records from WHO and the CDC show no evidence of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) or equivalent declaration related to a rapidly spreading DR-TB strain in U.S. travelers as of mid-2025. These guidelines recommend a six-month all-oral regimen known as BDLLfxC (bedaquiline, pretomanid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and clofazimine) for MDR/RR-TB cases and modified nine-month regimens when fluoroquinolone resistance is excluded, WHO officials said.

Historical records indicate that WHO has issued formal disease-outbreak communications concerning DR-TB in relation to air travel, such as a 2007 notice about an XDR-TB patient who traveled on commercial flights between the United States and Europe. That incident prompted passenger contact tracing but did not result in a PHEIC or global emergency declaration. WHO’s guidance on TB and air travel emphasizes that the risk of transmission during flights is relatively low and increases primarily on long-haul flights lasting eight hours or more, particularly for passengers seated close to an infectious individual, according to WHO and CDC documents.

CDC officials noted that most travelers are at low risk of acquiring TB through casual travel, with pre- and post-travel testing recommended mainly for those planning extended stays or work in high-transmission environments such as healthcare facilities, prisons, refugee camps, or homeless shelters. The agency also stated that individuals with active infectious TB, especially drug-resistant forms, should generally avoid commercial air travel until they are non-infectious to prevent potential transmission.

Epidemiological analyses show that while TB cases occur among non-immigrant visitors to the United States—one study documented 14,134 incident TB cases among visitors over multiple years—these cases are managed individually and have not been linked to a newly emergent DR-TB strain associated specifically with U.S. travelers. CDC and WHO sources emphasized that drug-resistant TB remains a significant global health challenge, with hundreds of thousands of MDR/RR-TB cases reported worldwide annually, but the presence of such cases in the U.S. does not constitute a new or rapidly spreading global strain.

Domestically, drug-resistant TB is relatively uncommon compared to the global burden. Highly publicized cases of drug-resistant TB in the United States, including the first documented case of a highly drug-resistant strain in a particular jurisdiction, are managed through case isolation, tailored treatment regimens, and public health follow-up rather than triggering international emergency mechanisms, according to CDC and local health department sources.

WHO’s current activities against DR-TB focus on supporting countries to scale up rapid molecular diagnostics, ensuring access to second-line medications, and strengthening infection prevention and control measures. These efforts reflect a sustained crisis response rather than the activation of a new emergency framework. The agency’s technical and programmatic work, including the 2025 guideline updates, aims to improve treatment outcomes and reduce the burden of DR-TB globally.

Past incidents involving MDR or XDR TB patients traveling internationally by air have led to international collaboration between WHO, CDC, and national health authorities for passenger notification and risk communication. However, these events have been managed as isolated incidents without escalation to a global health emergency. WHO and CDC records do not indicate any recent emergency committee meetings or press releases declaring a new global health emergency related to DR-TB strains detected in U.S. travelers.

Tuberculosis, including drug-resistant forms, continues to be a major public health priority worldwide, requiring ongoing surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment scale-up. WHO and CDC officials stress that the global response to DR-TB involves long-term strategies and technical support rather than single-event emergency declarations. The agencies continue to monitor TB epidemiology closely and update guidelines as new evidence emerges.

The new plan builds on the Inflation Reduction Act signed by President Joe Biden in 2022, which set a $35 monthly cap on out-of-pocket insulin costs for Medicare Part D beneficiaries and limited insulin cost-sharing under Medicare Part B to the same amount. That policy took effect on Jan. 1, 2023, for Part D and July 1, 2023, for Part B, according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The Medicare insulin cap applies to all insulin products covered under Medicare Part D plans, not just a preferred brand, and eliminates deductibles for insulin under both Part D and Part B when the cap applies, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF).

KFF estimates that about 3.3 million people enrolled in Medicare Part D plans have benefited from the insulin cost cap framework.

CMS described the Medicare insulin cap as part of the Biden-Harris administration’s “lower cost prescription drug law” and said the policy created the first-ever annual cap on out-of-pocket drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries. The cap covers insulin delivered through pumps under Part B, expanding protections to more insulin users than earlier voluntary programs.

The Biden administration’s announcement on Wednesday extends the $35 monthly insulin cap to people with commercial insurance, aiming to reduce the financial burden for the broader population with diabetes. According to KFF, this expansion follows earlier legislative efforts such as the Affordable Insulin Now Act (S.3700), which proposed capping insulin cost-sharing at $35 or 25% of the negotiated price for private health insurance starting in 2023. That bill also included provisions to cap insulin costs under Medicare during a transition period before applying a permanent $35-or-25%-of-negotiated-price standard beginning in 2024.

The White House noted that pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly announced a $35 insulin price following President Biden’s public calls for drugmakers to lower insulin prices and cap out-of-pocket expenses for all Americans. The administration framed the insulin cap as a signature achievement under the Inflation Reduction Act, designed to improve affordability and access to essential diabetes treatment.

Before the Inflation Reduction Act, CMS tested a voluntary Part D Senior Savings Model that allowed participating plans to cap monthly insulin copays at $35. The Affordable Insulin Now Act referenced this voluntary program, which was scheduled to expire on Dec. 31, 2025. The transition from voluntary pilot programs to a mandatory statutory cap under Biden’s law marked a significant change in federal insulin policy.

Reports indicate that by April 1, 2024, more than 1.7 million Medicare beneficiaries had reached the $2,000 annual out-of-pocket cap on prescription drugs, which includes insulin. KFF Health News found that people with diabetes covered by Medicare or private insurance paid an average of $452 annually in out-of-pocket insulin costs, contradicting earlier claims that Medicare beneficiaries paid around $400 per month prior to the cap. KFF noted that while the insulin cap is a real policy change, the historical cost claims were overstated.

Some sources credit the Trump administration with proposing an earlier Medicare insulin cap pilot, but the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act made the policy permanent and expanded its scope. STAT reported that the original $35 Medicare insulin concept was first proposed in a 2019 pilot context before being codified into law. The most authoritative sources on current Medicare insulin policy remain the Inflation Reduction Act, CMS, and KFF’s Medicare policy analysis.

While the $35 insulin cap is now a mandatory limit under Medicare, the broader extension to all insured Americans through commercial insurance remains a newly announced plan by the Biden administration. Legislative efforts to codify such a cap for private insurance have been introduced but not enacted. The administration’s announcement signals a policy direction aimed at expanding insulin affordability protections beyond Medicare beneficiaries to the wider population with diabetes.

The FDA’s first approved gene-editing therapies use CRISPR technology to treat sickle cell disease, not type 1 diabetes, according to agency records and expert reviews. Another gene therapy for sickle cell disease, Lyfgenia by bluebird bio Inc., uses a lentiviral vector but does not involve gene editing, FDA documents show.

On Dec. 8, 2023, the FDA authorized Casgevy (exa-cel), developed by Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. and CRISPR Therapeutics, as the first cell-based gene therapy employing CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing for patients 12 years and older with sickle cell disease and vaso-occlusive complications.

For type 1 diabetes, no gene-editing therapy has yet received FDA approval, according to a 2025 review commissioned by the FDA and conducted by the PHG Foundation. The report states that gene therapies aimed at reducing or eliminating insulin dependence remain in preclinical stages, limited to in vitro and animal model research. The foundation cited biological and practical challenges, including the autoimmune nature of type 1 diabetes and difficulties in targeting and regulating gene expression, as reasons for the stalled progress in direct gene therapy for this condition.

The FDA did approve Lantidra (donislecel) on June 28, 2023, as the first allogeneic pancreatic islet cellular therapy for adults with type 1 diabetes who experience repeated severe hypoglycemia despite intensive management. Manufactured by CellTrans Inc., Lantidra consists of donor pancreatic islet cells harvested from deceased human donors. These cells are infused into the portal vein to engraft in the liver, where they produce insulin. However, Lantidra is classified as a cellular therapy, not a gene-editing or gene-therapy product, because it does not involve CRISPR or other genome editing techniques, according to FDA classification.

Clinical studies involving 30 participants showed that some achieved insulin independence after receiving Lantidra, while others had reduced but ongoing insulin requirements. The therapy requires chronic immunosuppression to prevent rejection, and most participants experienced at least one serious adverse event related to either the infusion procedure or immunosuppressive medication, FDA clinical data indicate.

Experimental gene-editing approaches for type 1 diabetes remain in early clinical or preclinical phases. Sana Biotechnology has reported early clinical data using CRISPR-Cas9 to create “hypoimmune” donor-derived islet cells designed to evade immune detection, potentially eliminating the need for immunosuppressive drugs. In a single-participant trial, these modified islet cells were implanted into the forearm muscle, and by day 28, investigators observed endogenous insulin production without immunosuppression. However, this work is preliminary, and long-term safety and efficacy have yet to be established, according to expert commentary and FDA-related analyses.

Other investigational gene therapies targeting type 1 diabetes include KRIYA-839, developed by Kriya Therapeutics, which aims to provide a one-time gene therapy expressing insulin and glucokinase via intramuscular delivery. These therapies remain in preclinical or early clinical development without FDA approval, reflecting ongoing industry research but not regulatory authorization.

The PHG Foundation report also highlights the potential for advanced cell-based therapies, including genome-edited induced pluripotent stem cells, as nearer-term options compared to systemic gene therapy. It notes that future gene therapy strategies may become feasible, particularly for rare monogenic forms of diabetes, but emphasizes that such developments are prospective and not yet realized.

In summary, while gene-editing technology has achieved regulatory milestones in diseases like sickle cell anemia, type 1 diabetes treatment currently relies on cellular therapies such as Lantidra. Gene-editing approaches for type 1 diabetes remain investigational, with no FDA-approved products as of mid-2026, according to agency officials and expert reviews.

The six-month trial, known as the International Diabetes Closed Loop (iDCL) Trial and registered as NCT03563313, randomly assigned adults and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in a 2-to-1 ratio to use either a hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery system or a sensor-augmented insulin pump, according to the study published Wednesday in the *New England Journal of Medicine* (NEJM). Funded by the U.S. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), the trial measured the primary endpoint as the percentage of time glucose levels remained within the target range of 70 to 180 mg/dL over six months, using continuous glucose monitoring.

The closed-loop system increased the average time in target glucose range from 61% ± 17% at baseline to 71% ± 12%, while the control group’s time in range remained essentially unchanged at 59% ± 14%, the study reported.

The adjusted mean difference between groups was 11 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 14; P<0.001), equivalent to approximately 2.6 additional hours per day spent in the target range with closed-loop therapy. The closed-loop group also experienced 10 percentage points less time in hyperglycemia and 0.88 percentage points less time in hypoglycemia (below 70 mg/dL), translating to roughly 2.4 fewer hours per day in high glucose levels and 13 fewer minutes per day in low glucose levels compared with the control group.

The trial demonstrated improved glycated hemoglobin (A1c) levels in the closed-loop group compared with the sensor-augmented pump group, according to the authors. This improvement in A1c coincided with the increased time in range and reductions in both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia over the study period. The authors concluded that the closed-loop system led to a greater percentage of time with glucose levels in the target range, less hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, and better A1c levels than the sensor-augmented pump.

Safety outcomes showed low and comparable rates of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) between the two groups. The authors noted no excess of serious adverse events with closed-loop therapy, underscoring a favorable risk-benefit profile. Records from the trial indicated that severe hypoglycemia and DKA events were rare across both arms during the six-month period.

Additional NEJM trials in younger populations have reported similar findings. A trial involving children aged 2 to under 6 years (PEDAP; NCT04796779) found that hybrid closed-loop therapy increased time in target glucose range by 12.4 percentage points (95% CI, 9.5 to 15.3; P<0.001), or about three hours per day, compared with standard care using continuous glucose monitoring and usual insulin delivery. The mean difference in A1c between closed-loop and standard care was −0.42 percentage points (95% CI, −0.62 to −0.22; P<0.001), favoring the closed-loop group. Importantly, this improvement occurred without a significant increase in time spent below 70 mg/dL, indicating enhanced glycemic control without increased hypoglycemia risk. Severe hypoglycemia events were infrequent, with two cases in the closed-loop group and one in the standard-care group over the 13-week study.

Another NEJM trial evaluating a Cambridge hybrid closed-loop algorithm in very young children reported improved glycemic control compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy over 16 weeks, with no increase in hypoglycemia or serious adverse events. That trial recorded one severe hypoglycemic event during the closed-loop period and no episodes of DKA.

Broader NEJM research has also examined closed-loop insulin delivery in pregnancy complicated by type 1 diabetes and in children and adolescents with new-onset disease. In pregnancy, hybrid closed-loop therapy significantly improved maternal glycemic control compared with standard care without unanticipated safety concerns, according to published findings. A separate trial assessing closed-loop therapy’s impact on C-peptide secretion in new-onset type 1 diabetes found that while glycemic targets were better managed, the decline in beta-cell function was not slowed over 24 months.

Collectively, these NEJM trials, supported by federal funding and conducted across multiple centers, provide evidence that hybrid and closed-loop insulin delivery systems improve time in glucose target range and lower A1c in diverse patient populations with type 1 diabetes. The studies consistently report low rates of severe hypoglycemia and DKA and no increase in serious adverse events under trial conditions. These findings contribute to the growing body of data supporting automated insulin delivery as a safe and effective approach to glycemic management in type 1 diabetes.

The FDA has not approved a drug called RebiQuent for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis in adults, according to official FDA databases, press releases, and safety communications reviewed through June 2024. Current FDA-approved oral small-molecule treatments for this condition include abrocitinib and upadacitinib, both oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors that received approval in January 2022, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and a 2022 Washington State Health Care Authority evidence review.

Clinical trials demonstrated that 47.5% of patients taking 200 mg of abrocitinib daily achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1, indicating clear or almost clear skin, at 12 weeks, compared with 32.0% of patients on 100 mg.

Abrocitinib is indicated for adults 18 years and older with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis who have not responded to other systemic therapies or for whom such treatments are not advisable. Upadacitinib showed even higher efficacy, with 60 to 70% of participants achieving at least a 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75) by weeks 12 to 16, compared with 29 to 40% for abrocitinib and baricitinib, the latter of which was still under investigation at the time of the 2022 review.

The Washington State Health Care Authority report, published in 2022, identified abrocitinib and upadacitinib as FDA-approved oral JAK inhibitors for atopic dermatitis, while baricitinib remained under study. The report characterized these newer therapies as expanding treatment options beyond traditional systemic immunosuppressants but noted the importance of monitoring for safety concerns, including serious infections and thrombosis, which are associated with JAK inhibitors as a class.

No FDA or major regulatory, clinical, or manufacturer sources have documented approval of RebiQuent as a treatment for atopic dermatitis. Searches of FDA records, PubMed, and dermatology society communications yielded no references to RebiQuent as an approved product name or as a brand or generic equivalent of abrocitinib, upadacitinib, baricitinib, or other oral treatments for atopic dermatitis. Peer-reviewed literature describes abrocitinib explicitly as a “recently FDA-approved” oral JAK-1 inhibitor for adult patients with moderate to severe disease, confirming that oral small-molecule treatments in this class have been available since early 2022.

In addition to oral small molecules, biologic therapies such as dupilumab (Dupixent) have been FDA-approved for adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis who cannot use or have failed topical corticosteroids. Approved under Priority Review and Breakthrough Therapy designations, dupilumab demonstrated significant efficacy in clinical trials, with patients achieving clear or almost clear skin and reduced itch after 16 weeks. Other biologics recently approved or under investigation include lebrikizumab, nemolizumab, and tralokinumab, according to the Washington State review.

Traditional systemic treatments such as cyclosporine, methotrexate, azathioprine, and mycophenolate mofetil remain options for severe cases but carry risks of broad immunosuppression and side effects. Newer targeted therapies aim to reduce these risks by selectively modulating disease pathways.

Topical treatments have also seen recent FDA approvals. In July 2024, the FDA approved ZORYVE (roflumilast) cream 0.15% for mild to moderate atopic dermatitis in adults and children aged six years and older. This once-daily, steroid-free topical phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor is indicated for long-term disease control and rapid itch reduction. Clinical data report common adverse reactions including headache (2.9%), nausea (1.9%), application-site pain (1.5%), diarrhea (1.5%), and vomiting (1.5%). The manufacturer is also evaluating a lower 0.05% strength of roflumilast cream for children aged 2 to 5 years.

Head-to-head trials have shown that abrocitinib 200 mg once daily provides greater improvements in disease severity and itch response at 12 weeks compared with dupilumab administered subcutaneously every other week. Most adverse events reported with abrocitinib were described as not severe and self-limited, consistent with selective JAK-1 inhibition, although JAK inhibitors carry class warnings for serious infections, thrombosis, and laboratory abnormalities.

The 2022 Washington State Health Care Authority report emphasized the role of newer therapies, including oral JAK inhibitors and biologics, in improving disease severity scores and quality of life relative to older treatments. It also noted the need to balance efficacy with safety and long-term risks associated with these agents. Topical JAK inhibitors such as ruxolitinib have also been FDA-approved as non-systemic alternatives, showing high response rates in clinical studies.

Overall, official records and peer-reviewed sources confirm that oral small-molecule treatments for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis in adults have been FDA-approved since January 2022, with no evidence supporting the approval of a drug named RebiQuent.