Category: 3. Business

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 22, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Armata Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NYSE American: ARMP) (“Armata” or the “Company”), a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on the development of high-purity, pathogen-specific bacteriophage therapeutics for the treatment of antibiotic-resistant and difficult-to-treat bacterial infections, today highlighted positive results from its recently completed Phase 2a diSArm study of AP-SA02 as a potential treatment for complicated Staphylococcus aureus (“S. aureus“) bacteremia (“SAB”) in a late-breaking oral presentation at IDWeek 2025™.

The abstract, titled, “A Phase 2a Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of an Intravenous (IV) Bacteriophage Cocktail (AP-SA02) vs. Placebo in Combination with Best Available Antibiotic Therapy (BAT) in Patients with Complicated Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia,” was accepted as a highly coveted late-breaking abstract for oral presentation, and was presented by Dr. Loren G. Miller, M.D., M.P.H., Professor of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Chief, Division of Infectious Diseases at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center and the Lundquist Institute.

“The results of the diSArm study confirm, for the first time in a randomized clinical trial, the efficacy of intravenous phage therapy for S. aureus bacteremia, and we are very pleased to highlight these compelling data in an oral presentation at IDWeek,” stated Dr. Miller. “The results of this rigorously designed study provide strong rationale for advancement into a Phase 3 superiority study that, if successful, would support its use in clinical practice for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. High-purity, phage-based therapeutics like AP-SA02 have the potential to become the new standard of care for this common, extremely severe, and often deadly infection.”

“The positive results from the diSArm study represent another significant achievement for Armata as we aim to advance AP-SA02 into a pivotal trial,” stated Dr. Deborah Birx, Chief Executive Officer of Armata. “I would like to thank Dr. Miller and the other investigators who contributed to the efficient execution of the diSArm study, and I look forward to working with many of them on a proposed pivotal study next year. I would also like to thank Dr. Vance Fowler who served as the chair of the independent blinded adjudication committee that independently confirmed safety and efficacy findings throughout the Phase 2 trial. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to the patients who participated in this important study, and acknowledge our partners at the U.S. Department of Defense, and our significant shareholder, Innoviva, who have each provided critical support to make this early breakthrough possible.”  

Data highlights:

The Phase 2a study enrolled and dosed 42 patients, with 29 randomized to AP-SA02 in addition to BAT and 13 to placebo (BAT alone). Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (“MRSA”) was the causative pathogen in ~38% of both the AP-SA02 and placebo groups.

Clinical response was assessed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population at Test of Cure (“TOC”) on day 12, one week post-BAT, and End of Study (“EOS”) four weeks after BAT completion. Safety analysis also included data from the Phase 1b portion of the trial (n=8).

Day 12 clinical response rates were higher in the AP-SA02 group — 88% (21/24) versus 58% (7/12) in the placebo group as assessed by blinded site investigators (“PI”) (p = 0.047), and 83% (20/24) in the AP-SA02 group versus 58% (7/12) in the placebo group as assessed by the blinded Adjudication Committee (“AC”).

Non-response/relapse rates were evaluated at the two later timepoints — one week post-BAT and EOS. No patients in the AP-SA02 group experienced non-response or relapse (0%) by either PI or AC assessment. In contrast, the placebo group showed 25% non-response/relapse at both timepoints reported by the PI (p = 0.017) and 22% non-response/relapse at one week post-BAT (p = 0.025) and 25% at EOS (p = 0.02)  by the AC.

Patients treated with AP-SA02 showed trends toward rapid normalization of C-reactive protein, shorter time to negative blood culture, quicker time to resolution of signs and symptoms at the infection site, shorter intensive care unit and hospital utilization.

AP-SA02 was well-tolerated with no serious adverse events related to the study drug. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 6% (2/35) and 0% (0/15) in the AP-SA02 and placebo groups, respectively: one patient with transient liver enzyme elevation and one patient with hypersensitivity that resolved with discontinuation of vancomycin.

New findings demonstrate that the defined and reproducible genomic variants present in AP-SA02 Drug Product may provide an immediate advantage, enabling rapid, strain-specific response to each patient’s S. aureus isolate. These characterized variants can expand from as little as 2% to dominance when infecting certain patient isolates in vitro, highlighting that these variants are favored for their enhanced ability to infect those strains and the importance of integrating this diversity into Armata’s phage cocktail from the outset.  This inherent flexibility may be central to achieving optimal therapeutic efficacy.

Conclusions:

• AP-SA02, combined with BAT, had a higher and earlier cure rate compared to placebo in patients with complicated SAB at day 12 as assessed by both blinded site investigators and independent adjudicators.
• No patients who received AP-SA02 demonstrated non-response or relapse at one week post-BAT or at EOS, as assessed by both blinded site investigators and the independent adjudication committee, compared with approximately 25% in the placebo group.
• AP-SA02 appears safe with clinical efficacy against both MRSA and methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (“MSSA”) and trends toward earlier resolution and shorter hospitalization, with no evidence of relapse four weeks post-therapy.
• Defined phage variants in AP-SA02 Drug Product ensure an intrinsic adaptive mechanism — a flexibility that may be key to achieving effective phage therapy from patient to patient.
• These results strongly support advancement into a pivotal Phase 3 trial that Armata plans to initiate in 2026, subject to review and feedback from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”). The Company is engaged with the FDA regarding a potential superiority trial design.

About IDWeek 2025™

IDWeek 2025™ is a joint annual meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA), the HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA), the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society (PIDS) and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists (SIDP). With the theme “Advancing Science, Improving Care,” IDWeek features the latest science and bench-to-bedside approaches in prevention, diagnosis, treatment and epidemiology of infectious diseases, including HIV, across the lifespan. IDWeek 2025™ takes place October 19-22 in Atlanta, GA. For more information, visit www.idweek.org.

About AP-SA02 and diSArm Study
Armata is developing AP-SA02, a fixed multi-phage phage cocktail, for the treatment of complicated bacteremia caused by Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), including methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) strains.

The diSArm study (NCT05184764) was a Phase 1b/2a, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple ascending dose escalation study of the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of intravenous AP-SA02 in addition to best available antibiotic therapy (BAT) compared to BAT alone (placebo) for the treatment of adults with complicated S. aureus bacteremia. The results from the diSArm study are an important step forward in Armata’s effort to confirm the potent antimicrobial activity of phage therapy and the completion of the study represents a significant milestone in the development of AP-SA02, moving Armata one step closer to introducing an effective new treatment option to patients suffering from complicated S. aureus bacteremia.

The Phase 1b/2a clinical development of AP-SA02 was partially supported by a $26.2 million Department of Defense (DoD) award, received through the Medical Technology Enterprise Consortium (MTEC) and managed by the Naval Medical Research Command (NMRC) – Naval Advanced Medical Development (NAMD) with funding from the Defense Health Agency and Joint Warfighter Medical Research Program.

About Armata Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Armata is a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on the development of high-purity pathogen-specific bacteriophage therapeutics for the treatment of antibiotic-resistant and difficult-to-treat bacterial infections using its proprietary bacteriophage-based technology. Armata is developing and advancing a broad pipeline of natural and synthetic phage candidates, including clinical candidates for Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, and other important pathogens. Armata is committed to advancing phage therapy with drug development expertise that spans bench to clinic including in-house phage-specific current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMP”) manufacturing to support full commercialization.

Forward Looking Statements
This communication contains “forward-looking” statements as defined by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements relate to future events, results or to Armata’s future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause Armata’s actual results, performance or events to be materially different from any future results, performance or events expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify these statements by terms such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “should,” “will,” “would” or the negative of those terms, and similar expressions. These forward-looking statements reflect management’s beliefs and views with respect to future events and are based on estimates and assumptions as of the date of this communication and are subject to risks and uncertainties including risks related to Armata’s development of bacteriophage-based therapies; ability to staff and maintain its production facilities under fully compliant cGMP; ability to meet anticipated milestones in the development and testing of the relevant product; ability to be a leader in the development of phage-based therapeutics; ability to achieve its vision, including improvements through engineering and success of clinical trials; ability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development of, and obtain regulatory approval of its product candidates and commercialize any approved products on its expected timeframes or at all; and Armata’s estimates regarding anticipated operating losses, capital requirements and needs for additional funds. Additional risks and uncertainties relating to Armata and its business can be found under the caption “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in Armata’s filings and reports with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), including in Armata’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the SEC on March 21, 2025, and in its subsequent filings with the SEC.

Armata expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements contained herein to reflect any change in Armata’s expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statements are based. 

Media Contacts:

At Armata:
Pierre Kyme
[email protected]
310-665-2928

Investor Relations:
Joyce Allaire
LifeSci Advisors, LLC
[email protected]
212-915-2569

SOURCE Armata Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

News highlights:

• Through a unified PyTorch workflow, developers can seamlessly deploy PyTorch models across billions of Arm-based edge devices, unlocking faster, more advanced on-device AI applications and experiences
• Developers’ workloads automatically benefit from performance and efficiency gains when targeting devices built on Arm CPUs, GPUs and NPUs through Arm KleidiAI, TOSA, and CMSIS-NN backend integrations in ExecuTorch
• Whether building for mobile, PC, wearables, edge sensors or high-performance IoT, developers can start benefiting from ExecuTorch 1.0 GA release now, with extensive resources from Arm and Meta available here

Imagine private, on‑device AI assistants and voice interfaces that run without needing cloud connectivity and respond with minimal latency, chatbots that suggest replies as you type, gaming experiences that adapt in real-time to every player, and smarter always-on, power efficient sensors in wearables and IoT devices that deliver powerful intelligence with low energy use.

These are the kinds of AI experiences that ExecuTorch – Meta’s on-device runtime for PyTorch – and Arm will help developers build, while delivering optimized performance and faster development through a unified PyTorch workflow that runs seamlessly across billions of Arm-based edge devices. The latest milestone for ExecuTorch is today’s General Availability (GA) release, which brings the vision of running AI everywhere into a practical, scalable reality for millions of developers.

What ExecuTorch 1.0 GA Enables: One Workflow, Billions of Edge Devices

The ExecuTorch 1.0 GA release transforms how developers bring their PyTorch models to life at scale. Instead of having model versions, pipelines, or frameworks tuned separately for different device types, developers can author, export, optimize, quantize and deploy the same PyTorch workflow end-to-end across mobile, embedded and edge, minimizing fragmentation and boosting time-to-market.

This gives developers one toolset to seamlessly deploy their apps and workloads, unlocking more advanced, faster AI experiences and features across a broad range of edge devices, from ultra-efficient microcontrollers to flagship smartphones, that run on Arm CPUs, GPUs and Ethos-U NPUs. A recent Meta blog post highlights some examples of on-device AI features powered by ExecuTorch that are already serving billions of people on Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp, including improved video call quality, music recommendations and creative storytelling.

The Arm ExecuTorch Enablers

Together, Arm KleidiAI, CMSIS-NN and the Tensor Operator Set Architecture (TOSA) deliver a unified optimization framework through backend integrations in ExecuTorch, so developers’ apps and workloads targeting Arm-based edge devices automatically benefit from performance and efficiency gains with no need to modify their codes or models.

KleidiAI, which provides Arm kernel integrations to accelerate AI workloads across current and future Arm CPU platforms, is now integrated in multiple frameworks and runtimes, including the XNNPACK Runtime used by ExecuTorch. In parallel, the CMSIS-NN ExecuTorch backend integration serves as the equivalent enabler for Arm Cortex-M-based microcontrollers, providing support for highly efficient, directly integrated inference on constrained edge devices.

The TOSA integration in ExecuTorch provides a unified execution interface for edge AI and machine learning (ML) workloads running on Arm GPUs and Ethos-U NPUs. TOSA converts models into a standardized hardware-agnostic representation, enabling consistent deployment, portability, and verification across these technologies, and reducing engineering effort.

What The ExecuTorch 1.0 GA Release Brings to Mobile and Edge AI Markets

Mobile

For mobile, the ExecuTorch 1.0 GA release enables developers to deploy more intelligent on-device AI experiences faster and more efficiently across the billions of Arm-based smartphones in use today, as well as next-generation mobile devices.

Key benefits include:

• Faster time-to-market through seamless integration with Android app workflows and full support for PyTorch – from model development to deployment – on mobile.
• Built-in performance gains through KleidiAI optimizations, delivering faster startup times, lower latency, and reduced memory usage for a range of advanced on-device AI features and experiences, from text and audio generation to real-time voice and virtual assistants. For example, the Stable Audio Small text-to-audio model generates 11 seconds of audio in just 7 to 8 seconds entirely on-device running on Arm CPUs, with the generation time dropping to under four seconds on SME2-enabled consumer devices.  
• Extensive Arm technology support, enabling AI models to run across all current and future Arm CPUs and GPUs, including:
  • Current Arm Mali and Immortalis GPUs via the Vulkan path; and

Edge AI and High Performance IoT

The Arm Ethos-U processor family – which provides best-in-class acceleration across edge AI applications in IoT markets – is a key production backend extensively supported by the ExecuTorch 1.0 GA release.

This delivers:

• Accelerated time-to-market through ahead-of-time (AoT) compilation and runtime support, and availability of virtual platforms that mean developers can start building their apps and workloads before the availability of Ethos-U-based hardware. For example, through Arm Corstone subsystems developers can begin by emulating Ethos-U targets on the Fixed Virtual Platform (FVP), then move to FPGA prototypes, and finally to silicon implementations built on Corstone.
• An extensive portfolio for developers, with over 100 pre-validated AI models (many of which are listed here and here), including image classification and keyword spotting, ready for end-to-end deployment on Ethos-U NPUs using ExecuTorch.
• Enhanced portability via the TOSA standard, which means that models built for one Arm platform can be deployed across many.
• Streamlined model compilation through the integrated Arm Vela compiler, which optimizes and partitions AI workloads for Ethos-U NPUs to automatically boost efficiency and lower latency without additional manual work.
• Efficient AI inference, even on very constrained power budgets, via strong operator coverage, quantization tools, and fallback paths, like CMSIS-NN support for Cortex-M-based microcontrollers.

Moreover, in high performance IoT, the KleidiAI integrations with leading AI frameworks accelerates the performance and efficiency of key models, including Meta Llama 3 and Phi-3, on Arm CPUs.

Learn more about what the ExecuTorch 1.0 GA release means for developers targeting edge AI and high-performance IoT markets in this Arm Community technical blog.

Developers Can Access ExecuTorch 1.0 GA Benefits Now

Developers can start benefitting from the ExecuTorch 1.0 GA straight away. Head to developer.arm.com, explore all the learning paths for ExecuTorch, review the relevant documentation and tutorials, and then integrate the workflows into your model export, compilation, and deployment pipelines. Also more details about ExecuTorch can be found on the PyTorch landing page, alongside developer documentation for XNNPACK, Ethos-U, VGF and Vukan devices. Whether building for mobile, PC, wearables or edge sensors, the development path forward is unified and seamless.

Bringing Edge AI to Life Everywhere for Everyone

The ExecuTorch 1.0 GA release reaffirms Arm’s vision that AI runs consistently and seamlessly across every layer of our hardware ecosystem. Together with the strength of the Arm compute platform and our broad ecosystem, ExecuTorch 1.0 unlocks the scalability, performance, and innovation needed to bring the next generation of edge AI experiences to life everywhere, for everyone.

Arm at the 2025 PyTorch Conference

Visit the Arm talks at the PyTorch conference to learn more about how to deploy AI models and workloads at scale on Arm-based platforms. Visitors can also see ExecuTorch 1.0 in action at the Arm booth and learn more about how to access its full benefits across edge AI applications and workloads.

By Sharbani Roy, VP, AI and Developer Platforms, Arm

Any re-use permitted for informational and non-commercial or personal use only.

The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has handed down its much awaited judgement in the “Boundary Fares” cases. It held the Train Operating Companies had not abused any dominant position they may have as a result of their conduct in relation to so-called Boundary Fares.

Collective Proceedings (or mass claims based on an infringement of UK Competition Law) have been much in vogue in recent years as private enforcement of Competition Law has become a reality in the English Courts. A number of claimants and their advisers have sought to bring Collective Proceedings which have a very tenuous basis under UK Competition Law.

In the rail fares litigation, the claimant (or class representative) sought to broaden the types of behaviour deemed to be an “abuse of a dominant position” to include:

1. Failure to make Boundary Fares sufficiently available for sale to customers holding a valid TfL Travelcard, and
2. Failure to ensure that customers holding a valid TfL Travelcard were aware of the existence of Boundary Fares when buying tickets.

Having reviewed the evidence, the CAT unanimously concluded, on the assumption that the three Train Operating Company defendants each held a dominant position, none of the conduct alleged against them constituted an abuse of that position.

Whilst “abuse” is a broad concept and the concept of exploitative abuse by “unfair” conduct should develop to reflect new patterns of commerce, the CAT observed the concept is not unlimited. It also observed that Competition Law is not a general law of consumer protection.

The fact that the dominant company could have carried out a particular aspect of its business better, or in a different way that would have benefited consumers, does not mean that this conduct crosses the line to constitute “abuse”.

Strong and compelling evidence is required to establish abuse of a dominant position, and this was lacking in the rail fares litigation. There were particular reasons why so-called Boundary Fares were made available in the way that they were by the three Train Operating Companies, and the fact that passengers did not buy a Boundary Fare or bought smaller numbers of Boundary Fares compared to the number of Travelcards sold, did not establish that they were unaware of this option.

The CAT noted that a dominant company has no duty under Competition Law actively to assist all its customers to pay the lowest price or to buy the optimal product for their needs. It was accepted that it would have been possible for the Train Operating Companies to do further marketing in relation to Boundary Fares. However, this was just one type of fare among many. Each company had to choose its priorities, both in terms of expenditure generally and as the subject of its marketing campaigns.

Collective Proceedings are an expensive form of litigation often funded by litigation funders. When chosen appropriately, such proceedings can help to bring redress to persons who would otherwise find it difficult to pursue a valid claim. A number of Collective Proceedings claims in the English Courts have either failed or have recovered much smaller sums than were originally claimed. This is to be expected as a system develops and “finds its feet”.

Litigation funders and lawyers alike can be expected to study carefully the findings of the CAT in the rail fares litigation. There are lessons to be learned from this litigation and other Collective Proceedings actions.

Such claims will continue to be brought but may become more limited to situations where the legal basis for the claim is clear and/or the level of loss to class members is readily ascertainable.

In the meantime, the Train Operating Companies in the rail fares litigation will feel relieved that the concept of “abuse” has not been extended to cover situations not previously found to constitute a breach of the so-called “special responsibility” which applies to dominant companies.

Barclays has insisted it has the right controls in place to manage a £20bn exposure to the under-fire private credit industry despite warnings from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Bank of England.

The bank’s chief executive, CS Venkatakrishnan, said it ran a “very risk-controlled shop” and was comfortable with its lending standards for the private credit industry.

That was despite taking a £110m loss over the US sub-prime auto lender Tricolor, which collapsed amid fraud allegations last month.

Losses stemming from the dual collapse of Tricolour and the US auto parts company First Brands have raised fears over potentially weak lending standards in the private credit industry. There are concerns that the potential fallout could destabilise traditional banks that issue loans to the shadow banking sector.

The governor of the Bank of England, Andrew Bailey, said this week that the recent failures had worrying echoes of the sub-prime mortgage crisis that kicked off the global financial crash of 2008. Last week the IMF warned that a downturn could have ripple effects across the financial system, given banks were increasingly exposed to a largely unregulated private credit industry.

Venkatakrishnan said: “There are obviously connections between what non-bank financial institutions do and what banks do.” However, he suggested that the IMF report was pointing out probabilities and was ultimately “subjective”.

When asked whether he agreed with the JP Morgan chief executive, Jamie Dimon, who said last week that more “cockroaches” could emerge from the private credit sector, the Barclays boss quipped: “I’m not an entomologist.”

He said: “Whatever forms of lending you do, you should do it carefully and with the right controls.” When it came to private credit, he said Barclays limited lending to private credit loan portfolios “constructed by some of the largest, most experienced managers with a strong track record.

“We have controls over them … [and] we think we run … a very risk-controlled shop when it comes to it, and that’s something we’ve instituted for a long, long time.”

Venkatakrishnan said Barclays even turned down potential exposure to First Brands despite being approached multiple times.

Venkatakrishnan said the loss on Tricolor itself was not a surprise. He said: “The surprise was the fraud. Now fraud is no excuse; we take our credit risk management very seriously at all points in the cycle.” However, he said lenders always had to be prepared for “all outcomes including fraud”.

While Barclays revealed a £20bn exposure to the private credit sector, Venkatakrishnan noted it was a “relatively small” compared with the £346bn of loans currently issued to consumers and business customers across the bank.

His comments came as Barclays reported a 7% drop in pre-tax profits to £2.08bn in the three months to the end of September, down from £2.2bn during the same period last year.

Alongside the Tricolor loss, Barclays’ earnings were also hit by a £235m provision to cover compensation over the car loan commissions scandal. It makes it the latest high street bank to put aside extra cash in response to the Financial Conduct Authority’s proposed £11bn redress programme.

It takes Barclays’ total compensation pot to £325m. The company no longer provides car finance but is dealing with the fallout for the remaining loans on its books

However, that did not stop the bank from announcing fresh payouts for investors – another £500m worth of share buybacks. The bank also plans to switch to quarterly payouts for shareholders, rather than waiting for half-year and end-of-year earnings.

“I continue to be pleased with the ongoing momentum of Barclays’ financial performance over the last seven quarters,” Venkatakrishnan said, adding that he was upgrading the profitability guidance – under a measure known as return on tangible equity – for the full year.

The hack of Jaguar Land Rover has cost the UK economy an estimated £1.9bn, potentially making it the most costly cyber-attack in British history, a cybersecurity body has said.

A report by the Cyber Monitoring Centre (CMC) said losses could be higher if there were unexpected delays to the return to full production at the carmaker to levels before the hack took place at the end of August.

JLR was forced to shut down systems across all of its factories and offices after realising the extent of the penetration. The carmaker, Britain’s biggest automotive employer, only managed a limited restart in early October and is not expected to return to full production until January.

As well as crippling JLR, the hack has affected as many as 5,000 organisations across Britain, given the wide extent of the carmaker’s complex supply chain. While JLR has been able to rely on its large financial buffers, smaller suppliers were immediately forced to lay off thousands of workers and contend with a painful pause in cashflow.

“This incident appears to be the most economically damaging cyber event to hit the UK, with the vast majority of the financial impact being due to the loss of manufacturing output at JLR and its suppliers,” the CMC’s report said.

The CMC is an independent non-profit organisation made up of industry specialists including the former head of Britain’s National Cyber Security Centre, Ciaran Martin. Martin said it looked like the most costly UK attack “by some distance”, and added that organisations needed to work out how to react if vital networks were disrupted.

JLR, which is owned by India’s Tata Group, will report its financial results in November. A spokesperson for the carmaker declined to comment on the report.

The luxury carmaker has three factories in Britain that together produce about 1,000 vehicles a day. The incident was one of several high-profile hacks to affect large UK companies this year. Marks & Spencer lost about £300m after a breach in April forced the retailer to suspend its online services for two months.

JLR, which analysts estimated was losing about £50m a week from the shutdown, was promised a £1.5bn loan guarantee by the UK government in late September to help it support suppliers. However, before receiving that cash, the carmaker launched its own efforts to support its supply chain, paying for parts upfront.

The CMC, which is funded by the insurance industry and categorises the financial impact of significant cybersecurity incidents affecting British businesses, ranked the JLR hack as a category 3 systemic event, out of a scale of five.

The £1.9bn estimate “reflects the substantial disruption to JLR’s manufacturing, to its multi-tier manufacturing supply chain, and to downstream organisations including dealerships”, the report said.

Government ambitions in space are approaching what some may still think of as science fiction. In August 2025, NASA set a 2030 target for construction of a lunar nuclear reactor to support the US-led and EU-supported Artemis program’s plan for a permanent moon base.  While this target faces significant technical and financial challenges, it reflects a real sprint to outcompete autocratic rivals. China and Russia are coordinating on a similar “International Lunar Research Station” powered by a nuclear reactor for completion in the mid-2030s.

Emerging technologies are key drivers of this new space race. Analysts with experience at the European Space Agency, NASA, MIT, and in the private space sector argue that these technologies could make a cislunar economy—economic activity spanning Earth, the Moon, and the space between—feasible by mid-century, though experts debate when key capabilities will mature. Key technologies include:

• artificial intelligence (AI), which could facilitate autonomous in-space servicing and assembly (ISAM), enabling individually-launched modular components to self-assemble into mega-structures such as next-generation telescopes and orbital refueling stations. Even factories could be built this way, leveraging microgravity and space extremes to produce items impossible to make on earth, with applications in fiber optics, semiconductors, and novel materials. The first pieces of this world are already here: US-based Varda Space Industries uses microgravity for biopharmaceutical drug development.
• quantum technologies, which could safeguard military and commercial data in space using a network of quantum-encrypted satellites. Space-based atomic clocks developed by the European Space Agency could synchronize these systems and allow greater autonomous navigation in deep space. Emerging quantum sensors measure tiny gravitational fluctuations to identify more-and-less dense materials below the Earth’s surface, enabling satellites to map aquifers and critical mineral deposits. The same measurements could identify high-value sites for mining on the Moon.
• biotechnologies, which could be key to sustaining long-term human activity in cislunar space. Researchers are engineering lightweight, self-healing composites made from fungi to serve as radiation shields for space stations and Moon bases. Near-future synthetic biology applications could reduce the need to resupply space habitats through the use of bioregenerative life support systems that generate oxygen and food.

The United States and the EU already support these industries; the EU’s draft Space Act and the Trump administration’s August executive order on commercial space development each signal backing for the industry. Yet, staying ahead of China demands more. Allies should leverage complementary strengths by investing in each other’s commercial space sectors and reducing barriers to integrating advanced capabilities. These steps will not suffice by themselves, but they would materially boost competitiveness—positioning the United States and the EU to outpace China and unlock the cislunar economy.

The way we download apps onto our phones could be about to change after a ruling from the UK’s competition regulator.

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has designated Apple and Google as having “strategic market status” – effectively saying they have a lot of power over mobile platforms.

This means the two tech giants may have to make changes, after the CMA said they “may be limiting innovation and competition”.

The ruling has drawn fury from the tech giants, with Apple saying it risked harming consumers through “weaker privacy” and “delayed access to new features”, while Google called the decision “disappointing, disproportionate and unwarranted”.

“We simply do not see the rationale for today’s designation decision,” Google competition lead Oliver Bethell said.

But the CMA said it did not “find or assume wrongdoing” from the firms.

“The app economy generates 1.5% of the UK’s GDP and supports around 400,000 jobs, which is why it’s crucial these markets work well for business,” said Will Hayter, the CMA’s executive director for digital markets.

The investigation into Apple and Google’s app stores, browsers and operating systems focused on how prominent their own apps are compared with rivals.

“Around 90-100% of UK mobile devices running on Apple or Google’s mobile platforms,” the CMA has previously said, adding this meant the firms “hold an effective duopoly”.

According to analysis from Uswitch, 48.5% of UK users have an iPhone – which runs Apple’s iOS operating system (OS) – with the vast majority of the rest using Google’s Android OS.

It comes after a separate decision taken in October, where the CMA designated Google’s search division as having strategic market status.

It is unknown exactly what changes the regulator will look to request, but in July it published roadmaps outlining potential measures it would take if the firms were found to have strategic market status.

These include requiring it to be easier for people to transfer data and easily switch between Apple and Android devices, and for both firms to rank apps “in a fair, objective and transparent manner” in their app stores.

Apple specifically may be required to allow alternative app stores on its devices, and let people download programs directly from companies’ websites.

Such a move would be a significant change to the so-called “closed system” which has defined iPhones since their inception, where apps can only be downloaded from Apple’s own App Store.

Both of these things are currently possible on Android devices – but the roadmap said Google may have to “change the user experience” of downloading apps directly from websites, as well as “remove user frictions” when using alternative app stores, such as listing them directly on the Google Play Store.

Android is an open-source operating system, which means developers can use and build on top of it for free.

Google argues this means it opens up competition.

Mr Bethell said “the majority of Android users” use alternative app stores or download apps directly from a developer’s website, and claimed there is a far greater range of apps available for Android users compared to those on Apple devices.

“There are now 24,000 Android phone models from 1,300 phone manufacturers worldwide, facing intense competition from iOS in the UK,” he said.

Meanwhile, Apple warned the UK could lose access to getting new features – as has happened in the EU – which the company blames on tech regulation.

For example, some Apple Intelligence features which have been rolled out in other parts of the world are not available in the EU.

“Apple faces fierce competition in every market where we operate, and we work tirelessly to create the best products, services and user experience,” the company said in a statement.

“The UK’s adoption of EU-style rules would undermine that, leaving users with weaker privacy and security, delayed access to new features, and a fragmented, less seamless experience.”

But consumer group Which? said curbs on these companies’ power in other countries “are already helping businesses to innovate and giving consumers more choice”.

“Their dominance is now causing real harm by restricting choice for consumers and competition for businesses,” said its head of policy and advocacy Rocio Concha.

Key takeaways:

• • • Alignment of goals — Aligning departmental goals with the organization’s overall strategy is crucial for enhancing efficiency, fostering innovation, and driving long-term success.

    • Role of AI — AI can play a pivotal role in achieving this alignment by helping corporate functions define value and align their goals with the organization’s strategy.

    • Top-down approach needed — Successful alignment often requires a top-down approach to AI implementation, ensuring that AI strategies are integrated across the broader enterprise.

In today’s fast-paced and ever-evolving corporate landscape, the alignment of departmental goals with the overarching strategy of the organization is more crucial than ever. This alignment ensures that every in-house function is working towards a common objective, thereby enhancing the overall efficiency, innovation, and success of the organization as a whole.

Additionally, aligning departmental goals with the organization’s strategy also can eliminate the perception that certain corporate functions are merely cost centers, according to Thomson Reuters recently published 2025 Future of Professionals report. Indeed, many corporate functions — especially in areas like legal, risk, tax, and trade — are often seen as misaligned with the organization’s overall goals, which can lead to inefficiencies and a lack of strategic contribution from these departments.

Today, corporate leaders are under immense pressure to demonstrate how various functions contribute strategically to the value of the business rather than just managing costs. This urgency is also driven by the understanding that companies are navigating unprecedented regulatory and geopolitical complexity in the current environment, which really underscores the need for new ways to address this situation.

In today’s fast-paced and ever-evolving corporate landscape, the alignment of departmental goals with the overarching strategy of the organization is more crucial than ever.

Increasingly, in-house function leaders are looking to AI tools and solutions to find a way to bridge this critical intersection of commerce and compliance.

Yet the Future of Professionals report showed there is a strategic gap in AI usage. While nearly half (48%) of corporate professionals responding to the survey say they expect transformational AI-driven changes within their corporate functions this year, just 19% say that these functions have a departmental AI strategy in place.

In most successful transformations, however, organizations adopt an end-to-end approach that starts at the top and has the AI strategies cascade down directly from overarching enterprise goals to departmental implementation. This ensures that AI is not implemented in isolation but is integrated into the broader organizational strategy, thereby maximizing its potential to drive alignment and strategic contribution.

Empowering corporate functions with AI-driven tech

However, for departments to align their goals with the organization’s strategy, they need to be empowered with advanced technology — and it’s up to the C-Suite to drive this empowerment. Corporate management needs to ensure that their in-house functions are equipped with the tools they need to contribute strategically to the organization’s success by enabling new business, driving operational efficiency, and maintaining strict compliance. By leveraging this advanced technology, departments then can move beyond managing costs and demonstrate their strategic value to the overall enterprise.

Not surprisingly, as the report addressed, there are barriers to these efforts, with the two major hurdles being organizational silos and leadership commitments. Silos themselves are a significant challenge to many corporate initiatives that require collaboration and a change of mindset. As our research has shown, when corporate functions implement AI in isolation or without a unified enterprise strategy, they’re going to miss out on the full potential of AI to break down those internal barriers.

As for the commitment from corporate leaders, all of them should first assess where their organizations and key departments sit on their AI adoption journey. The goal should be to craft a custom-tailored AI strategy that will allow each function to secure additional ROI while acting in concert with the organization’s overall strategy.

All of this serves the greater purpose, because those organizations that can demonstrate a clarity of vision around AI will be the ones reporting better outcomes more quickly. It will be these organizational leaders who foster a culture in which former cost centers are now seen as a growth engine that can drive their professionals and the overall organization forward. For that to happen, however, these leaders must think beyond the technology and focus on how their departments’ mindset — and that of the overall organization — needs to change.

Achieving mindset shift and cultural change

Not surprisingly, achieving alignment between departmental goals and organizational strategy requires a significant mindset shift and cultural change. Today, there is a growing understanding that in-house functions should not be viewed as cost centers but as strategic business partners — and this shift in mindset is crucial for fostering a culture in which AI is seen as a growth engine and a tool for achieving strategic goals.

Not surprisingly, achieving alignment between departmental goals and organizational strategy requires a significant mindset shift and cultural change.

In this way, in-house departments can become the type of business partners that can really add value and that can use AI in a manner that will truly empower their ability to achieve these goals. And this mindset shift needs to happen not only among the leaders of the enabling functions, but within the C-Suite itself. If all parts of the organization are focused on how each can create value and how they can leverage AI as a tool to do that, it becomes a powerful accelerator.

AI itself also has a pivotal role to play in aligning departmental goals with organizational strategy by helping corporate functions define value, especially in today’s complex regulatory and geopolitical environment in which departments may have their hands full simply navigating these unprecedented challenges daily.

To demonstrate this, however, departments need to measure their progress as they move away from a focus on cost reduction and towards strategic value creation. Using specific success metrics — including those that measure a department’s ability to enhance foresight and prediction and improved decision-making — departments can demonstrate how each in-house function contributes to the enterprise’s strategic goals.

In fact, many organizations and their in-house functions seem well on their way down this path toward tighter alignment. While there are some corporate executives that are uncertain about AI and the level of change it will bring about, it’s clear that this is not the time nor the environment to bury your head in the sand.

Looking forward

To aligning departmental goals with the organization’s overall strategy is essential for driving efficiency, fostering innovation, and achieving long-term success. And to make this happen, C-Suite executives need to ensure that each of their corporate functions has its own AI strategy — one which complements the overall organization’s key goals. Further, departmental leaders need to develop AI strategies and then encourage collaboration with other function leaders to break down practical barriers and learn from each other.

By empowering functions with advanced technology, adopting a top-down approach to AI implementation, and leveraging success metrics, organizations can ensure that all departments are working towards a common objective and contributing strategically to the overall success of the enterprise.