LONDON — A deadly outbreak of meningitis in the United Kingdom linked to a nightclub in England’s southeast has killed two people with new cases being reported daily. Health officials are rolling out preventive antibiotics to those who attended the nightclub earlier this month, to close contacts of cases and to local university students. The latter are also being offered a vaccine. But as U.K. health officials move to contain the outbreak, it has added to proliferating cases of meningitis across Europe — and has exposed patchy access to vaccines to prevent the disease. Since 2021 Europe has seen increasing rates of invasive meningococcal disease, which is caused by a bacterial infection. The majority of cases have been linked to the same “group B” family of bacteria that caused the outbreak in England.  POLITICO looked into how prepared EU countries are for a similar outbreak. WHAT HAPPENED IN THE UK? From March 13-18 some 27 cases of invasive meningococcal disease were identified in the southeast of England, the U.K. Health Security Agency said Thursday. Nine have been confirmed as Neisseria meningitidis group B.  At least 10 people who caught the illness had attended a nightclub in Canterbury from March 5-7. Most are students from the University of Kent in Canterbury or are upper-year students from local secondary schools.  The illnesses have been severe with rapid deterioration. Two young people have died: an 18-year-old high school student and a 21-year-old university student. Health Secretary Wes Streeting described the cases as “an unprecedented outbreak.” France reported one case to the U.K. in someone who had also visited the university then travelled to France, Streeting told parliament on Tuesday. “The patient has been hospitalized and is in stable condition,” a health ministry spokesperson told POLITICO, adding that close contacts had been alerted and offered antibiotics, and that no further cases had been reported. HOW IS THE UK RESPONDING? Health officials have set up four centers in and near Canterbury for students and those who attended the nightclub to receive preventive antibiotics. Family doctors in the region have been advised to offer treatment to anyone who visited the nightclub. “This is the main intervention that will help protect people and halt the spread of the outbreak,” said Trish Mannes from the U.K. Health Security Agency. In addition, “as a further precaution,” 5,000 university students are being contacted and offered a vaccine to protect against meningitis group B, Mannes said.  Nearby hospitals and schools have been told how to spot symptoms, how to prevent infection and respond.    A student receives an injection at the University of Kent campus in Canterbury, U.K. on March 19, 2026. | Gareth Fuller/PA Images via Getty Images HAVE CASES BEEN RISING ELSEWHERE? Since 2021, cases of invasive meningococcal disease in Europe have been rising. In 2023 there were 1,895 confirmed cases, including 200 deaths in the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. Group B remains the major cause of the disease, accounting for 57 percent of cases with known type, and was the dominant group in all ages under 65 years. “Its notification rate has been increasing since 2021,” a European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control report said. France, Germany and Spain accounted for 57 percent of all confirmed cases, while Belgium, the Netherlands and Lithuania reported the second highest notification rate. Group Y infections were the second-most reported (20 percent of cases with known serogroup) and the most reported in those over 65. Group W infections were the third-most reported overall (15 percent of cases with known serogroup). Around 20 percent of young people carry the MenB bacteria in their noses and throats; the disease happens when the bacteria enter the bloodstream and when a person’s immune system is low. It causes a high fever, headache, vomiting and drowsiness, and can lead to inflammation of the brain and sepsis. It has a mortality rate of around 10 percent. Those that survive are at risk of lifelong disability due to the amputations or brain damage caused by the infection. WHO CAN GET THE VACCINE? GlaxoSmithKline’s MenB vaccine Bexsero was approved in Europe (including the U.K.) in 2013 and was rolled out as routine vaccination in the U.K. to infants in 2015. Infants are most at risk due to their lack of immunity. There are over 100 different strains of MenB; the vaccine covers between 75 percent and 80 percent of them, said Adam Finn, professor emeritus of pediatrics at the University of Bristol. “The level of protection after 2 doses is very high and lasts for some years at least,” he added. Infections also arise in adolescents, but the U.K. hasn’t offered MenB vaccinations in older children since it was launched.  In Europe, 12 countries routinely offer the vaccine to infants for free —  the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal and Spain. Croatia and Poland offer it to children and adults with compromised immune systems. Austria recommends the vaccine in infants but doesn’t fund it. Meanwhile, 12 countries — Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden — don’t offer the vaccine at all. Seventeen EU countries offer vaccination against meningococcal serogroups A, C, Y and W. British Health Secretary Wes Streeting arrives in Downing Street in London for a Cabinet meeting on Jan. 17, 2026. | Zeynep Demir/Anadolu via Getty Images WHY ISN’T VACCINATION UNIVERSAL?  Each EU country takes advice from their independent immunization committees, which recommend which vaccines to offer citizens. “National epidemiology — based on surveillance data — and cost effectiveness considerations determine these decisions,” Beate Kampmann, professor of pediatric infectious diseases and immunology and professor of global health, told POLITICO. That means vaccine schedules in EU countries “differ as a result.” “MenB meningitis is a rare disease and the vaccine is expensive,” Brendan Wren, professor of microbial pathogenesis at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, said of the U.K. position. “Although given to young children who are the most vulnerable to MenB, it is not freely available to the whole population.”  In light of the ongoing outbreak, however, Streeting told parliament that the country’s vaccination committee was reviewing whether to expand eligibility for the MenB jab. In 2019, Belgium’s immunization experts decided not to offer the vaccine to infants or adolescents, citing the low incidence of the disease, the need to administer three shots, and the fact the vaccine “is not very cost-effective.” The Netherlands said in 2022 that its Health Council wasn’t recommending the MenB vaccine “due to the relatively small burden of disease, the side effects of the vaccine and need for several doses, as well as cost.” But the council is now reviewing its position again, with a decision expected in the next quarter, a ministry spokesperson told POLITICO. COULD THE EU BUY VACCINES? The EU can procure vaccines for groups of countries, with the Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority acting as a negotiator with drugmakers in such cases.  This could be an option for vaccines like Bexsero, should there be interest. “The Netherlands had a positive experience with the EU role in the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines and is open to discussing a role for the EU in other joint procurement procedures,” the Dutch health ministry said. Meanwhile, the vaccine is available for private purchase in most EU countries, but supplies in the U.K. are limited.  The EU can procure vaccines for groups of countries. | Alicia Windzio/picture alliance via Getty Images “Pharmacies are being inundated by requests from concerned patients for MenB vaccination, which the vast majority of our members across the country have no stock currently available to fulfil,” said Olivier Picard, chair of the National Pharmacy Association. COULD THE OUTBREAK SPREAD TO EUROPE? That’s unlikely since it’s not as easily transmitted among people. “This outbreak is caused by a bacterial infection and by its nature it is a lot less infectious compared to Influenza, Measles or SARCOV-2,” said Bharat Pankhania, senior clinical lecturer at the University of Exeter Medical School. “These bacterial infections require close contact and it is a heavy droplet aerosol spread, thus not very infectious and you need to be in close prolonged contact with a case, a family member, or a kissing contact,” he said, adding there is no need for restrictions on movement. In Belgium, the health ministry said it is convening its scientific risk-assessment group “to evaluate the situation for our citizens and country.” Meanwhile, ECDC issued a statement Wednesday evening saying the risk to the general population in Europe from the British outbreak was “very low.” “Outbreaks of meningitis caused by Neisseria meningitidis typically occur in small clusters around cases or in places where many people gather. Although some secondary cases can occur among close contacts of cases, the disease does not spread in the community like, for example, a respiratory virus,” the disease agency said. Claudia Chiappa contributed to this article. Update: This article has been updated with UKHSA data issued March 19.

World Health Organization officials are preparing for a nuclear catastrophe if the U.S.-Israel war with Iran escalates further. U.N. staff are monitoring the fallout of U.S-Israeli attacks on Iran’s atomic sites and remain “vigilant” for any type of nuclear threat, Hanan Balkhy, WHO regional director for the eastern Mediterranean, told POLITICO. “The worst-case scenario is a nuclear incident, and that’s something that worries us the most,” Balkhy said. “As much as we prepare, there’s nothing that can prevent the harm that will come … the region’s way — and globally if this eventually happens — and the consequences are going to last for decades.” Staff are prepared for a nuclear incident in its “broader sense,” including an attack on a nuclear facility or the use of a weapon, Balkhy said. “We are thinking about it, and we’re just really hoping that it does not happen.” U.S. President Donald Trump has vowed to “eliminate the imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime,” though he has provided no evidence that Tehran was developing a nuclear weapon. Last June, the U.S. in coordination with Israel targeted nuclear infrastructure throughout Iran. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran confirmed that attacks took place at its Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz sites. The U.S. and Israel have continued to target nuclear sites since they launched their new offensive on Feb. 28. U.S. President Donald Trump is seen during the his departure the White House en route Hebron, Kentucky on March 11, 2026, in Washington DC. | Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images Israel and the United Arab Emirates also have nuclear facilities within range of Iran’s missiles, though there are no reports of these being targeted. Israel is itself widely believed to have a significant arsenal of nuclear weapons. To date there have been no reported signs of radioactive contamination anywhere in the region. But if a nuclear incident did expose people to dangerous levels of radiation, it would risk causing significant immediate trauma to their lungs and skin, and heighten the danger of developing cancer and mental health problems, Balkhy explained. The 1986 nuclear accident at the Soviet nuclear plant in Chernobyl, Ukraine officially caused around 30 deaths in the first few months, and later contributed to a surge in thyroid cancers, numbering in the thousands, and to high anxiety among the local population over the following decades. “I think those who read the history of previous incidents, whether intentional or accidental, are very aware of what we’re talking about,” Balkhy said. An estimated 110,000 to 210,000 people died from the U.S. nuclear attacks on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. As the war continues, some senior figures have begun to speculate on the use of nuclear warheads. David Sacks, Trump’s AI adviser, said he worried about “Israel escalating the war by contemplating using a nuclear weapon.” Trump rubbished the suggestion, telling reporters: “Israel wouldn’t do that.” The WHO is refreshing its staff on how to respond in the event of a nuclear incident, including providing advice to officials on the public health risks and what measures people should take to protect themselves.  Smoke rises after airstrikes in Tehran, Iran on March 13, 2026. | Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images Balkhy also warned there could be significant health impacts, such as respiratory illness, from the attacks on Iranian oil facilities earlier this month that have covered Tehran in smoke. ATTACKS ON HEALTH SYSTEMS Meanwhile, the WHO has continued to decry attacks on health infrastructure in the region. The WHO has so far recorded 46 attacks on health workers in Iran and Lebanon, with 38 killed, since the war began on Feb. 28. Israel killed 14 health workers in Lebanon in two strikes on March 13, including an attack on the Bourj Qalaouiyeh primary health care center in the south of the country. In a follow-up statement to POLITICO, Balkhy called the attacks “tragic and unacceptable,” adding that health workers must be protected under international law “at all times.” Health workers and United Nations officials have previously accused Israel of systematically destroying Gaza’s health system. Israel has denied that charge, typically stating the attacks are justified on military grounds or, such as in the case of a deadly double-tap strike on Nasser Hospital last year, a “tragic mishap.” By mid-2025, 94 percent of Gaza’s hospitals had been damaged or destroyed, according to the WHO. Kuwait reported on March 17 that two paramedics were injured when shrapnel from an Iranian attack fell on a medical center. A view of tents as Lebanese families who were forced to leave their homes due to Israeli attacks, took shelter in a school building in the Dahieh district of the capital Beirut, Lebanon, on March 15, 2026. | Houssam Shbaro/Anadolu via Getty Images Health ministries in Iran and Lebanon reported 1,444 and 886 civilian deaths, respectively, as of March 17. Lebanon says 107 children have died from the latest bombardment. The United Nations estimates that between 600,000 and 1 million Iranian households have been temporarily displaced, while there are 946,000 self-registered displaced individuals in Lebanon, according to figures provided to POLITICO by the WHO. The Israeli Ministry of Health does not include casualties in its daily updates on the war. As of March 8, the government said 13 people had been killed. The fragile health system in Lebanon, which was already under severe pressure before the latest attacks from Israel, is struggling to deal with the large numbers of displaced. “You’re talking about access to good food, clean water, the disruption of medical care provision, whether it’s childhood immunizations, whether it’s access to their medications, the dialysis patients, the cancer patients, it will have a huge toll on the people of Lebanon,” Balkhy said. An ambulance belonging to the Islamic Health Organisation seen outside Jabal Amel Hospital after an Israeli airstrike in Tyre, Lebanon on March 17, 2026. | Sally Hayden/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images The conflict is also exacerbating a Palestinian health crisis, with heavy restrictions on the amount of aid entering Gaza, Balkhy said. The WHO has reported critical shortages of medicines and medical supplies in Gaza, despite Israel saying there is enough aid entering the territory to meet humanitarian needs. The Palestinian Ministry of Health, meanwhile, says there are zero stocks of 46 percent of essential medicines. The scale of destruction in Gaza was so overwhelming, Balkhy said, that it would take “billions of dollars” and “decades to re-establish a dignified environment for these people to live in.”

BRUSSELS — Three MEPs — including the head of the French National Rally delegation in the European Parliament — have been sanctioned for failing to complete mandatory anti-harassment training. The three — Italy’s Domenico Lucano (The Left), France’s Jean-Paul Garraud (chief of National Rally delegation, part of the Patriots group), and Austria’s Petra Steger (Patriots) — have been barred from holding official parliamentary roles, according to a Parliament official, granted anonymity to speak about confidential cases. Lawmakers must complete “conflict and harassment prevention and good office management” training within six months of taking office. If they do not, MEPs cannot be elected as officeholders in any of the Parliament’s bodies, write reports, participate in an official delegation, or take part in negotiations with other EU institutions — unless the administration grants them an exception. They can still be members of committees. The training was set up in April 2024 in the wake of the #MeToo movement, after a survey carried out by an in-house campaign group called MeTooEP found 16 percent of respondents had faced sexual harassment, and after several news reports that harassment cases often went underreported for fear of repercussions. POLITICO reviewed the declaration pages of all MEPs on Feb. 18 and identified those who did not have a certificate showing that they had taken the course. Just three MEPs didn’t have the certificate. All three took up their roles in July 2024, which means they had until early 2025 to finish the training. Garraud and Steger did not reply to requests for comment. A spokesperson for the Patriots for Europe group did not reply to a request for comment. “Domenico Lucano received a prior derogation for this training due to illness and is currently waiting for the next opportunity for it to be offered in Italian,” said The Left group spokesperson, Tom Shannon. “He has already completed 4 out of 5 hours of the course and has stated his intention to complete the final hour as soon as possible and this is also the Left group’s expectation.” One of Lucano’s assistants said: “Of course he did the course, but he didn’t finish the last hour, as he had to run to a political meeting that day.” The assistant added they were waiting for a timeslot “to finish the hour that he needs to do, that’s why it probably looks like he didn’t do it.” The Parliament’s press service said it cannot comment on individual cases.

Today, cancer remains one of Europe’s leading causes of death and disability, accounting for 23 percent of all deaths in 2022 and 17 percent of disability-adjusted life years in 2021. Four Europeans are diagnosed with cancer every minute, a number that is expected to rise over the next several decades due to population aging. As the EU Beating Cancer Plan reaches the end of its initial phase, Europe now stands at a critical moment. The question is not whether progress has been made, but whether Europe will build on that momentum or allow it to stall, with consequences not only for health outcomes, but also for economic growth and scientific leadership. Gilles Marrache At this juncture, cancer care must be understood not as a cost to be contained, but also as a strategic investment that delivers measurable returns in survival, productivity and Europe’s global competitiveness. > Continued investment in oncology is therefore not only a moral imperative but > also a proven economic and social multiplier. Cancer innovation delivers proven returns Investment in cancer innovation has already delivered extraordinary value for European patients and societies. Since 1989, advances in oncology have helped prevent an estimated 5.4 million deaths. More recently, since 2012, innovative cancer medicines have generated approximately 1.1 million quality-adjusted life years, all while accounting for just 6.6 percent of total health budgets. These gains are not abstract. They represent longer lives, improved quality of life, and the ability for people to remain active contributors to their families, workplaces and communities. Continued investment in oncology is therefore not only a moral imperative but also a proven economic and social multiplier. Delayed access is holding Europe back Despite these returns, Europe continues to struggle with timely access to innovative cancer medicines and diagnostics. According to EFPIA’s 2025 W.A.I.T. data, only 46 percent of centrally approved innovative medicines are available to patients on average across Europe, with a mean delay of 578 days between EU approval and patient access. In oncology, these waits have grown since 2023, which undermines patient outcomes and weakens Europe’s competitiveness in health innovation. Europe’s innovation edge is at risk Without decisive action, Europe risks falling further behind other regions. High-income European countries currently invest roughly half as much per capita in innovative medicines as the United States. This gap is driven largely by differences in how new therapies are valued, assessed and reimbursed. The impact of this underinvestment is already visible. Over the past two decades, Europe has lost around a quarter of its global share of biopharmaceutical research and development. Along with that loss comes fewer high-quality jobs, reduced private investment and weakened strategic autonomy in a sector that is increasingly central to economic and health security. > evidence suggests that every euro invested in health can generate up to four > euros in economic value, unlocking an estimated €10 trillion in GDP and saving > up to 60 million lives. Smart health investment drives growth and resilience By increasing targeted investment in innovative medicines, including in oncology, Europe can improve health outcomes for citizens, support workforce participation  and stimulate sustainable economic growth. Globally, evidence suggests that every euro invested in health can generate up to four euros in economic value, unlocking an estimated €10 trillion in GDP and saving up to 60 million lives. What European policymakers should do next To support oncology patients and safeguard innovation, regional and national governments must act across policy, funding and access: — Value what matters: modernize health technology assessment frameworks to better capture the full societal and economic benefits of innovation, while reducing duplicative and inefficient evidence requirements. This is particularly important as oncology products begin going through the new EU Joint Clinical Assessment. — Accelerate access: introduce time-bound, predictable pricing and reimbursement pathways; address regional and formulary-level delays; and invest in diagnostic and biomarker testing capacity to ensure patients receive the right treatment at the right time. — Back prevention and screening: fully finance the EU Beating Cancer Plan’s screening ambitions and scale proven pilot programmes that detect cancer earlier and improve outcomes. — Invest in innovation: increase public spending on innovative medicines in line with their true societal impact, while eliminating clawbacks and other cost-containment measures that disproportionately undermine the value of these therapies. A defining choice for Europe Europe stands at a crossroads. It can choose to invest now in cancer innovation, which would help to close survival gaps, strengthen competitiveness and deliver long-term value for citizens. Or it can allow delays, underinvestment and fragmented policies to widen those gaps further. Aligning policy, funding and access around innovation would not only improve cancer outcomes but make health one of Europe’s most powerful and sustainable investments for the future.     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) * The political advertisement is linked to advocacy on securing a technology-neutral EU road-transport decarbonisation framework through recognition of renewable fuels, strengthened grid and infrastructure enablers, and avoiding mandates that limit operators’ choice and competitiveness. * The ultimate controlling entity is European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) More information here.

Europe stands at a crossroads. Cancer cases continue to rise, health systems are under visible strain and critical gaps in care remain unaddressed. Yet, just as the need for action grows more urgent, political attention to health — and to cancer — is fading. Now is the moment for Europe to build on hard-won work and ensure patients across the continent benefit from the care they deserve. As negotiations open on the EU’s next long-term budget (2028-34), priorities are shifting toward fiscal restraint, competitiveness and security. Health — once firmly on the political radar — is slipping down the agenda. This shift comes at a critical moment: Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, a €4 billion flagship effort to turn the tide against cancer, is set to end in 2027 with no clear commitment to renew its mandate. With cancer incidence rising and systems struggling, letting Europe’s cancer framework fade would be a costly mistake. Across Europe, patients, clinicians and advocates are sounding the alarm. > With cancer incidence rising and systems struggling, letting Europe’s cancer > framework fade would be a costly mistake. “With 2.7 million cancer diagnoses and 1.3 million deaths each year, Europe must reach higher for cancer care, not step back,” says Dr. Isabel Rubio, president of the European Cancer Organisation. “Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan has set a new course, but sustained funding is now essential to protect progress and close the gaps patients still face.” Protecting the status quo is not enough. If the EU is serious about patient-centered cancer care, it must make a firm commitment to cancer and confront long-overlooked gaps, namely one with profound impact but minimal political attention: cancer-related malnutrition. The invisible crisis undermining cancer care Nutrition remains one of the most glaring blind spots in European cancer care. Cancer-related malnutrition affects up to seven out of ten patients, driven by the disease and its treatments.1 Increased nutritional needs — combined with symptoms such as nausea, fatigue and loss of appetite — mean that many patients cannot meet requirements through normal diet alone. The result is avoidable weight loss that weakens resilience, delays treatment and undermines outcomes.2 A new pan-European study by Cancer Patient Europe, spanning 12 countries, underscores the scale of this silent crisis: despite widespread nutritional challenges, support remains inconsistent and insufficient. Only 20 percent of patients reported receiving a nutritional assessment during treatment, and just 14 percent said their nutritional status was monitored over time — a clear mismatch between needs and the care provided. > If the EU is serious about patient-centered cancer care, it must make a firm > commitment to cancer and confront long-overlooked gaps, namely one with > profound impact but minimal political attention: cancer-related malnutrition. International authorities have repeatedly raised concerns about these gaps. The WHO Regional Office for Europe has warned that without proper training, healthcare providers lack the tools to screen, diagnose and address cancer-related malnutrition — highlighting a systemic weakness that continues to be overlooked. Patients themselves understand these shortcomings and seek more information and support. Most recognize nutrition as essential to their wellbeing, yet only 26 percent say they received guidance from their care team. As Antonella Cardone, CEO of Cancer Patient Europe, stresses: “Too many patients are left to face nutritional challenges alone, even when these difficulties directly affect their ability to cope with treatment.” She continues: “Malnutrition is not peripheral to their care. It is central. Addressing malnutrition can contribute to better treatment outcomes and recovery.” Without systematic action, malnutrition will continue to erode patients’ resilience — a preventable barrier that demands attention. A viable yet under-used solution Yet, the tools to address malnutrition already exist. In cancer care, systematic nutritional support has been shown to improve treatment tolerance and support recovery. Medical nutrition — taken orally or through tube feeding — is a science-based intervention designed for patients who cannot meet their nutritional needs through diet alone. Research shows it can reduce complications, limit treatment interruptions and help patients regain strength throughout their cancer journey. “Precision oncology is not only about targeting tumors, but about treating the whole patient. When nutritional needs are overlooked, the effectiveness of cancer therapies is compromised from the very start of the clinical journey,” says Alessandro Laviano, head of the Clinical Nutrition Unit at Sapienza University Hospital Sant’Andrea in Rome. The case is equally compelling for health systems. Malnourished patients face more infections, more complications and longer hospital stays — driving an estimated €17 billion in avoidable costs across Europe each year. In other words, tackling malnutrition is not only clinically essential; it is fiscally smart, precisely the kind of reform that strengthens systems under pressure. > Malnourished patients face more infections, more complications and longer > hospital stays — driving an estimated €17 billion in avoidable costs across > Europe each year. Ultimately, the challenge is not the absence of tools, but their inconsistent use. Nutritional care has proven benefits for patients and for health systems alike, yet it remains unevenly integrated in cancer care across Europe. To change this, the EU needs a clear policy framework that makes nutritional care a standard part of cancer care. This means ensuring routine malnutrition screening, equipping healthcare professionals with the practical skills to act and guaranteeing equal access to medical nutrition for eligible patients. Keep cancer high on the agenda and close the nutritional gap Europe has both the opportunity and the responsibility to keep cancer high on the political agenda. A more equitable and effective approach to cancer care is within reach, but only if EU leaders resist scaling back ambition in the next budget cycle. Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, a major political and financial commitment, has strengthened prevention, screening, workforce training and patient rights. Yet the mission is far from complete. Cancer continues to affect millions of families and places a significant and rising burden on European health systems. Protecting progress means addressing persistent gaps in care. As the EU pushes for earlier detection, integrated pathways and stronger resilience, nutritional care must be part of that effort, not left on the margins. With such a patient-first approach — screening early, equipping clinicians and ensuring equitable access to medical nutrition — Europe can improve outcomes and further strengthen health systems. Now is the moment to build on hard-won progress and accelerate results for patients across the region. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- References 1. Ryan AM, et al. 2019. https://www.danone.com/newsroom/stories/malnutrition-in-cancer.html 2. Ipsos European Oncology Patient Survey, data on file, 2023. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Danone * The political advertisement is linked to advocacy on EU health and budgetary policy. It calls for sustained EU funding and political commitment to renew and strengthen Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan in the upcoming 2028–34 budget cycle, and urges integration of medical nutrition into EU cancer policy frameworks. The article explicitly addresses EU leaders and institutions, advocating policy and funding decisions to close gaps in cancer care across Member States. More information here.

Europe stands at a crossroads. Cancer cases continue to rise, health systems are under visible strain and critical gaps in care remain unaddressed. Yet, just as the need for action grows more urgent, political attention to health — and to cancer — is fading. Now is the moment for Europe to build on hard-won work and ensure patients across the continent benefit from the care they deserve. As negotiations open on the EU’s next long-term budget (2028-34), priorities are shifting toward fiscal restraint, competitiveness and security. Health — once firmly on the political radar — is slipping down the agenda. This shift comes at a critical moment: Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, a €4 billion flagship effort to turn the tide against cancer, is set to end in 2027 with no clear commitment to renew its mandate. With cancer incidence rising and systems struggling, letting Europe’s cancer framework fade would be a costly mistake. Across Europe, patients, clinicians and advocates are sounding the alarm. > With cancer incidence rising and systems struggling, letting Europe’s cancer > framework fade would be a costly mistake. “With 2.7 million cancer diagnoses and 1.3 million deaths each year, Europe must reach higher for cancer care, not step back,” says Dr. Isabel Rubio, president of the European Cancer Organisation. “Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan has set a new course, but sustained funding is now essential to protect progress and close the gaps patients still face.” Protecting the status quo is not enough. If the EU is serious about patient-centered cancer care, it must make a firm commitment to cancer and confront long-overlooked gaps, namely one with profound impact but minimal political attention: cancer-related malnutrition. The invisible crisis undermining cancer care Nutrition remains one of the most glaring blind spots in European cancer care. Cancer-related malnutrition affects up to seven out of 10 patients, driven by the disease and its treatments.1 Increased nutritional needs — combined with symptoms such as nausea, fatigue and loss of appetite — mean that many patients cannot meet requirements through normal diet alone. The result is avoidable weight loss that weakens resilience, delays treatment and undermines outcomes.2 A new pan-European study by Cancer Patient Europe, spanning 12 countries, underscores the scale of this silent crisis: despite widespread nutritional challenges, support remains inconsistent and insufficient. Only 20 percent of patients reported receiving a nutritional assessment during treatment, and just 14 percent said their nutritional status was monitored over time — a clear mismatch between needs and the care provided. > If the EU is serious about patient-centered cancer care, it must make a firm > commitment to cancer and confront long-overlooked gaps, namely one with > profound impact but minimal political attention: cancer-related malnutrition. International authorities have repeatedly raised concerns about these gaps. The WHO Regional Office for Europe has warned that without proper training, healthcare providers lack the tools to screen, diagnose and address cancer-related malnutrition — highlighting a systemic weakness that continues to be overlooked. Patients themselves understand these shortcomings and seek more information and support. Most recognize nutrition as essential to their wellbeing, yet only 26 percent say they received guidance from their care team. As Antonella Cardone, CEO of Cancer Patient Europe, stresses: “Too many patients are left to face nutritional challenges alone, even when these difficulties directly affect their ability to cope with treatment.” She continues: “Malnutrition is not peripheral to their care. It is central. Addressing malnutrition can contribute to better treatment outcomes and recovery.” Without systematic action, malnutrition will continue to erode patients’ resilience — a preventable barrier that demands attention. A viable yet under-used solution Yet, the tools to address malnutrition already exist. In cancer care, systematic nutritional support has been shown to improve treatment tolerance and support recovery. Medical nutrition — taken orally or through tube feeding — is a science-based intervention designed for patients who cannot meet their nutritional needs through diet alone. Research shows it can reduce complications, limit treatment interruptions and help patients regain strength throughout their cancer journey. “Precision oncology is not only about targeting tumors, but about treating the whole patient. When nutritional needs are overlooked, the effectiveness of cancer therapies is compromised from the very start of the clinical journey,” says Alessandro Laviano, head of the Clinical Nutrition Unit at Sapienza University Hospital Sant’Andrea in Rome. The case is equally compelling for health systems. Malnourished patients face more infections, more complications and longer hospital stays — driving an estimated €17 billion in avoidable costs across Europe each year. In other words, tackling malnutrition is not only clinically essential; it is fiscally smart, precisely the kind of reform that strengthens systems under pressure. > Malnourished patients face more infections, more complications and longer > hospital stays — driving an estimated €17 billion in avoidable costs across > Europe each year. Ultimately, the challenge is not the absence of tools, but their inconsistent use. Nutritional care has proven benefits for patients and for health systems alike, yet it remains unevenly integrated in cancer care across Europe. To change this, the EU needs a clear policy framework that makes nutritional care a standard part of cancer care. This means ensuring routine malnutrition screening, equipping healthcare professionals with the practical skills to act and guaranteeing equal access to medical nutrition for eligible patients. Keep cancer high on the agenda and close the nutritional gap Europe has both the opportunity and the responsibility to keep cancer high on the political agenda. A more equitable and effective approach to cancer care is within reach, but only if EU leaders resist scaling back ambition in the next budget cycle. Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, a major political and financial commitment, has strengthened prevention, screening, workforce training and patient rights. Yet the mission is far from complete. Cancer continues to affect millions of families and places a significant and rising burden on European health systems. Protecting progress means addressing persistent gaps in care. As the EU pushes for earlier detection, integrated pathways and stronger resilience, nutritional care must be part of that effort, not left on the margins. With such a patient-first approach — screening early, equipping clinicians and ensuring equitable access to medical nutrition — Europe can improve outcomes and further strengthen health systems. Now is the moment to build on hard-won progress and accelerate results for patients across the region. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- References 1. Ryan AM, et al. 2019. https://www.danone.com/newsroom/stories/malnutrition-in-cancer.html 2. Ipsos European Oncology Patient Survey, data on file, 2023. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Danone * The ultimate controlling entity is Danone More information here.

The three parties that have formed the new Dutch minority government have pitched raising the European minimum age for social media to 15, according to coalition plans unveiled on Friday. With the move, the Netherlands is the latest country to push for a de facto social media ban at 15, following France’s example. The three Dutch parties — the centrist D66, the Christian Democrat CDA and the liberal VVD — will still need to seek support for their proposals, as they hold only 66 of 150 seats in the Dutch parliament. The parties want an “enforceable European minimum age of 15 for social media, with privacy-friendly age verification for young people, as long as social media are not sufficiently safe,” they write in the plans. The current EU minimum age stands at 13. The coalition program also envisions a crackdown on screen time through prevention and health guidance, and stricter smartphone rules in schools, which will require devices to remain at home or in a locker. In June of last year, the previous Dutch government issued guidance to parents to wait until age 15 before allowing their children to use social media. Earlier this week, a bill to ban social media for users under 15 passed the French parliament’s lower chamber and could take effect in September. Australia paved the way by banning children from a range of platforms in December. The new Dutch government also is launching a push to become more digitally sovereign and to reduce “strategic dependencies” in areas such as cloud services and data. Eliza Gkritsi contributed to this report.

January 2026 I GB-73006 Disclaimer  POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT  * This is sponsored content from AstraZeneca.  * The advertisement is linked to public policy debates on the future of cardiovascular care in the UK.  * This content has been paid for and developed by AstraZeneca UK  Cardiovascular disease (CVD) has shaped the nation’s health for generations. It remains a leading cause of death and a major driver of long-term sickness, yet it is also one of the most preventable. Today, 8 million people in the U.K. live with CVD, and early deaths from CVD in England have reached a 14-year high.1,2 The reality is stark: without urgent action, one million more could live with CVD by 2030 — and two million by 2040.1  Tackling CVD is not only a moral imperative, it’s an economic necessity. In the U.K., 2.5 million working-age people are economically inactive due to long-term sickness, and CVD contributes to long-term sickness at unprecedented levels3 Each year, CVD costs the U.K. economy an estimated £24 billion, straining public finances, dampening productivity and widening inequalities.4  In July 2023, AstraZeneca convened the CVD-risk coalition — with charities, clinical organizations and patient groups — to shape a coordinated response to these trends.   Today, the coalition has published Getting to the heart of the matter: A national action plan for tackling cardiovascular disease5 — a blueprint for decisive action and a call for the government and the NHS to confront CVD head on. It has a clear message: the tools exist to tackle this challenge, but we need leadership, investment, and a focus on prevention and early intervention to unlock meaningful change.  > the tools exist to tackle this challenge, but we need leadership, investment, > and a focus on prevention and early intervention to unlock meaningful change. Diagnosis and prevention gaps we cannot afford   CVD often arises from detectable and treatable conditions: hypertension, high cholesterol, diabetes, chronic kidney disease. Yet millions remain undiagnosed. Six million people in the U.K. don’t know they have high blood pressure — a silent driver of heart attacks, strokes and kidney disease.6,7   This systemic diagnosis gap is not the result of a lack of evidence or clinical consensus; rather, the longstanding pressure on primary and community care, fragmentation across services, and declining investment in public health. Between 2015/16 and 2023/24, funding for key preventative services — including smoking cessation and adult obesity support — fell sharply in real terms.8  Additionally, secondary prevention remains patchy across England. Despite clear treatment guidance from NICE, less than half of patients with CVD meet recommended cholesterol levels. Almost 30 percent of hypertension patients are not meeting recommended blood pressure targets or don’t have a recent blood pressure measurement in their records.9   The consequences are clear: progress on CVD outcomes has stalled, premature deaths are rising and those in England’s most deprived areas are four times more likely to die prematurely from CVD than those in the least deprived.10  > progress on CVD outcomes has stalled, premature deaths are rising and those in > England’s most deprived areas are four times more likely to die prematurely > from CVD than those in the least deprived We must place prevention at the heart of our health system.  A vision for proactive, personalized cardiovascular care  Early CVD prevention and treatment save lives and money. It benefits patients, reduces NHS pressure and strengthens the UK’s economic resilience.   A 20 percent reduction in CVD incidence could save the NHS £1.1 billion annually within five years and place 60-70,000 more people into work.11 Recent CVDACTION modeling suggests that even modest near-term improvements in treatment could prevent approximately 61,000 events of heart attack, stroke, heart failure admission and end-stage kidney disease in three years.12   This is not theoretical. We know what integrated, proactive models can do.   Unlocking the power of data and digital tools  Platforms like CVDPREVENT and CVDACTION already demonstrate how data-driven insights from GP records can flag undiagnosed or undertreated patients — enabling clinicians to prioritize, optimize treatment and thus prevent avoidable heart attacks and strokes every year.13,14  Additionally, as the NHS App becomes a digital ‘front door’, there is an opportunity to deliver personalized risk information, lifestyle guidance and seamless access to services.  But digital transformation requires investment in workforce capability, interoperability between systems and national procurement frameworks that can scale at pace.  Tom Keith Roach A neighborhood approach to prevention  Joined-up neighborhood services — across community pharmacies, general practice, specialist teams and local authorities — could identify risk earlier, manage long-term conditions holistically and reduce avoidable admissions.   Community pharmacy hypertension screening has delivered over two million blood pressure checks in a single year, identifying thousands previously unaware of their risk.15    The LUCID program, developed as part of a joint working initiative between AstraZeneca and University Hospitals Leicester, has shown that integrated care across nephrology specialists and primary care can identify high-risk chronic kidney disease patients and optimize their treatment, reducing emergency admissions and long-term NHS costs.16    But to truly deliver change, resources must be rebalanced toward primary and community care. Cardiovascular prevention cannot be driven from hospitals alone. The neighborhood service must be properly resourced, with contracts and incentives aligned to prevention and outcomes, not activity.  A whole-system effort to transform lives and the economy  The forthcoming Modern Service Framework for CVD, promised within the Government’s 10 Year Health Plan, presents a critical opportunity. This framework must: * Embed prevention into every level of care  * Enable earlier diagnosis using digital and community-based tools  * Support optimal treatment through data and workforce innovation  * Define clear national priorities backed by accountability  CVD is a health challenge and a national prosperity challenge. We cannot afford rising sickness, worsening inequalities, and an NHS stretched by late-stage, preventable disease. The link between health and wealth has never been clearer: investing in CVD prevention will deliver both immediate and long-term returns.  > The link between health and wealth has never been clearer: investing in CVD > prevention will deliver both immediate and long-term returns. The action plan published today provides a clear, evidence-based roadmap.5 It calls for:  * National clinical and political leadership  * Ambitious targets, including a 20 percent reduction in incidence  * Investment in prevention and the expansion of Health Checks  * Improved uptake of effective treatments, guided by data  * Digital and diagnostic excellence across neighborhoods  * Partnership working at every level  A call to action  CVD has affected too many lives for too long. But progress is within reach. The decisions we make today will determine whether the next decade is defined by a widening crisis or a renewed national effort to prevent avoidable illness.  AstraZeneca stands ready to support the government, the NHS and partners to deliver the change our country needs. The time to act is now.  Find out more at astrazeneca.co.uk   References [1] British Heart Foundation. UK factsheet. January 2026. Available at: https://www.bhf.org.uk/-/media/files/for-professionals/research/heart-statistics/bhf-cvd-statistics-uk-factsheet-jan26.pdf.Last accessed: January 2026. [2] British Medical Journal. Early deaths from cardiovascular disease reach 14 year high in England. British Medical Journal. January 2024. Available at: https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj.q176. Last accessed: December 2025.   [3] Rising ill-health and economic inactivity because of long-term sickness, UK: 2019 to 2023. Office for National Statistics. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/economicinactivity/articles/risingillhealthandeconomicinactivitybecauseoflongtermsicknessuk/2019to2023. Last accessed: December 2025.   [4] UK Government. UIN HL5942. March 2025. Available at: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-03-18/hl5942. Last accessed: December 2025. [5] Getting to the heart of the matter. A national action plan for tackling cardiovascular disease. AstraZeneca. 2025. Available at: https://qr.short.az/r/Getting-to-the-heart-of-the-matter. Last accessed: January 2026. [6] Blood Pressure UK. Why is know your numbers! needed?. Available at: https://www.bloodpressureuk.org/know-your-numbers/why-is-know-your-numbers-needed/. Last accessed: December 2025.   [7] Department of Health and Social Care. Get your blood pressure checked. March 2024. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/get-your-blood-pressure-checked. Last accessed: December 2025. [8] The Health Foundation. Investing in the public health grant. February 2025. Available at: https://www.health.org.uk/reports-and-analysis/analysis/investing-in-the-public-health-grant. Last Accessed January 2026.  [9] CVDPREVENT. CVDP Annual Audit Report 2025. March 2025. Available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/65eafc36395e4d64e18a3232/t/6937fb8666a6d23761182c05/1765276550824/CVDPREVENT+Fifth+Annual+Report.pdf Last Accessed: January 2026. [10] Public Health England. Health matters: preventing cardiovascular disease. February 2019. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-matters-preventing-cardiovascular-disease/health-matters-preventing-cardiovascular-disease. Last accessed: December 2025. [11] Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. The economic case for Protect Britain, a preventative health care delivery programme. July 2024. Available at: https://assets.ctfassets.net/75ila1cntaeh/7CcuI38C3mxgps6lC9O2iA/825bf2a41f933cf719459087c1599190/Tony_Blair_Institute_for_Global_Change__The_Economic_Case_for_Protect_Britain__July_2024.pdf Last accessed January 2026 [12] Into-Action.Health. Powering the prevention shift – The CVDACTION impact model.  September 2025. Available at: https://www.into-action.health/_files/ugd/ee4262_81e75612f13e403aab6594727b338771.pdf. Last Accessed January 2026. [13]Data & Improvement Tool. CVDPREVENT. Available at: https://www.cvdprevent.nhs.uk/. Last accessed: December 2025.   [14] Transforming the prevention of CVD. CVDACTION. Health Innovation Network. Available at: https://thehealthinnovationnetwork.co.uk/case_studies/transforming-the-prevention-of-cvd/. Last accessed: December 2025. [15] NHS Business Services Authority. Dispensing contractors’ data. Available at: https://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/prescription-data/dispensing-data/dispensing-contractors-data . Last Accessed January 2026 [16] AstraZeneca UK. Executive summary of Joint Working outputs. Pan Leicester Integrated Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) Transformation Project: a quality improvement project to identify CKD patients in primary care suitable for virtual management to improve patient outcomes. (LUCID). July 2024. Available at: https://www.astrazeneca.co.uk/content/dam/intelligentcontent/unbranded/astrazeneca/uk/en/pdf/work-with-nhs-uk/Executive_Summary_of_Joint_Working_Outputs_Pan_Leicester.pdf. Last Accessed: January 2026

BRUSSELS — The European Commission suspects that a massive tranche of pro-industry comments on the EU’s proposed tobacco tax hike was “probably” a coordinated attempt to distort public feedback. The Commission received thousands of anonymous submissions promoting pro-tobacco industry arguments in the final hours of the public feedback period on its proposal on the Tobacco Tax Directive. There were also fake submissions purporting to be from public health experts opposing the plan. “We have been looking at the submissions in the public consultation and we saw some elements that indicated, indeed, some of the submissions were probably submitted in a coordinated manner and not necessarily representing individual views,” said David Boublil from the Commission’s tax department, in response to a question from POLITICO. Boublil didn’t say who was behind the coordinated submissions but said the lobbying from the tobacco industry on the file was “gigantic.” He was speaking at an event on tobacco taxation hosted by the European Respiratory Society in Brussels. Public consultations on controversial products like tobacco have attracted suspicious activity in the past. A 2024 U.K. consultation on tobacco and vaping policies received over 90,000 fraudulent responses that the government said was consistent with the use of bots. In Europe, this year is likely to see increased industry lobbying as two pieces of tobacco legislation are slated for review. The Commission’s plan to hike tobacco taxes is likely to be a contentious political issue: It wants to raise the EU-wide minimum levy on tobacco from €90 per 1,000 cigarettes to €215, but some countries think that’s too aggressive. Cyprus, which holds the presidency of the Council of the EU until the end of June, has suggested paring that back to €200 and giving countries an extra two years to implement the directive. The Commission also plans to overhaul its rules on the marketing and sale of nicotine products to cover e-cigarettes, heated tobacco and nicotine pouches in 2026. A draft European Parliament report said the Commission should extend its tobacco control laws to all non-medicinal nicotine products, including a crackdown on marketing, flavors and packaging.

Pharmacies across the U.K. are reporting widespread shortages of aspirin, one of the most widely prescribed drugs that is used to prevent heart attacks and strokes and treat pain. From a survey of 540 pharmacies, 86 percent had been unable to supply the medication to their patients in the past week, the National Pharmacy Association said Friday. Pharmacies said they have been rationing supplies, prioritizing patients with the most acute heart conditions or in need of emergency prescriptions, with several saying they stopped selling the medication over the counter. Olivier Picard, chair of the NPA, said the association is “concerned” about these reports and its implications on patients; 51 million aspirin items were prescribed in the U.K. between January and October last year. “For those pharmacies that can get hold of supply, costs will far exceed what they will be reimbursed by the [National Health Service], yet more signs of a fundamentally broken pharmacy contract in desperate need of reform by the government,” Picard said. Earlier this month, U.S. President Donald Trump made headlines for saying he takes a high daily dose of aspirin as it’s “good for thinning out the blood, and I don’t want thick blood pouring through my heart.” He reportedly takes four times the recommended daily dose for cardiovascular disease prevention. On Thursday, Trump blamed the medication for his visible hand bruise at Davos. In the U.K., pharmacists cannot offer patients substitutions for a prescribed medication, such as a different strength or formulation, without a new doctor’s prescription. The government is looking into the possibility of changing this. “We’ve long called for pharmacists to be able to make substitutions where a medicine is not in stock and it is safe to supply an alternative,” he said. “The status quo is not only frustrating for patients, it is also dangerous.” The government added aspirin to its export ban list on Jan. 16 amid the ongoing shortage. In the EU, the Pharmaceutical Group of the European Union said Friday they “don’t have any signal regarding shortages of aspirin in the EU.” The European Medicines Agency, which monitors drugs in short supply, does not currently list aspirin.