This Week in Medicine: AI imaging, gene therapy advances, and Imperial College London spotlight

AI foundation model achieves breakthrough in medical imaging

Researchers have trained a three-dimensional visual foundation model on 5.24 million routine clinical CT and MRI image series, enabling it to learn a shared representation of neuroanatomy and disease. The model demonstrated state-of-the-art diagnosis and enabled preliminary report generation and triage in real health systems, marking a significant advancement over models trained on public internet data.

Oral GLP-1 therapy shows promise for weight maintenance

A randomised, placebo-controlled trial presented at the European Congress on Obesity demonstrates that oral orforglipron, a nonpeptide GLP-1 receptor agonist, preserves weight loss and cardiometabolic benefits achieved with injectable therapies. This development makes it a viable oral maintenance strategy for patients, potentially improving adherence and accessibility.

Gene therapy for Parkinson's disease shows 12-month motor improvements

Phase 1 results from a trial of BBM-P002, a dual-target gene therapy co-delivering TH and DDC, reveal the treatment is safe and well tolerated in Parkinson's disease patients. Participants showed motor improvements at 12 months, signaling therapeutic potential for this novel approach to neurodegenerative disease.

Lassa fever vaccine trial reaches completion

An interim report of a first-in-human phase 1 trial found the LASSARAB vaccine—an adjuvanted, combination inactivated rabies-vectored Lassa fever vaccine—to be safe and immunogenic in healthy participants. The vaccine induced immunity to both Lassa and rabies viruses, with the last patient data collected in May 2026, representing a major step toward addressing two neglected yet deadly diseases prevalent in West Africa.

NHS pilot increases organ transplants by nearly 20%

The first patient has received an organ transplant through a new NHS pilot programme that will eventually increase the number of organ transplants by nearly 20% per year. This innovation addresses critical organ shortage challenges and represents a significant advancement in transplant medicine within the NHS.

World Hepatitis Day 2026 carries the theme "Hepatitis: Let's break it down"—a call to remove barriers standing between people and lifesaving services. While this message is compelling, it warrants deeper critical analysis from an applicant perspective.

The paradox of progress

The WHO acknowledges that effective vaccines, accurate diagnostics, curative treatments for hepatitis C, and lifelong therapies for hepatitis B already exist. Yet viral hepatitis claims over one million lives annually from preventable, detectable, and treatable diseases. This presents a fundamental healthcare delivery failure, not a scientific one.

Consider the Eastern Mediterranean Region: despite 44% of hepatitis C cases being diagnosed and 31% treated, 3.1 million diagnosed cases remain untreated. For hepatitis B, the figures are starker—less than 2% of patients receive needed treatment. These aren't awareness gaps; they're access, equity, and resource allocation failures.

The interview angle: systemic versus individual responsibility

This awareness day raises questions highly relevant to medical school interviews. When tools exist but millions remain untreated due to "stigma, limited awareness, health system gaps, and persistent inequalities," where does responsibility lie?

Applicants should consider: Can awareness campaigns truly "break down" structural barriers like poverty, healthcare infrastructure deficits, or unequal resource distribution? Or do they risk placing undue emphasis on individual behaviour change when systemic reform is needed?

Egypt's success story—and its limitations

Egypt moved from having one of the world's highest hepatitis C burdens to achieving "gold tier" status toward elimination through coordinated government action. This demonstrates what the campaign calls for: turning science into action through political commitment and sustained investment.

But here's the critical question for applicants: Egypt's success required years of coordinated government action, not merely raising awareness. This distinction matters. For your interviews, consider whether awareness days like this adequately acknowledge the political, economic, and structural changes required—or whether they risk oversimplifying complex public health challenges.

The NHS context

The NHS has tested over 100,000 people for hepatitis C through confidential home testing services, marking progress toward elimination as a public health threat. This is precisely the kind of innovative, barrier-reducing intervention the WHO advocates.

For applicants, this illustrates integrated, accessible service delivery—a theme that connects to broader NHS reforms around patient power, digital transformation, and reducing health inequalities. Understanding how hepatitis services fit within primary care and universal health coverage demonstrates systems-level thinking that interviewers value.

What to take away

World Hepatitis Day 2026 highlights a crucial tension in global health: the gap between what we can do scientifically and what we actually do systemically. For medical applicants, this awareness day offers rich material for discussing health equity, resource allocation, the social determinants of health, and the limits of individual versus structural interventions—all core themes in medical ethics and health policy discussions.

With AI foundation models now demonstrating state-of-the-art diagnostic performance in medical imaging and preliminary report generation in real health systems, a pressing ethical question emerges: When AI contributes to clinical decisions, who is morally and legally responsible for patient outcomes?

The ethical dilemma

Consider this scenario: An AI model trained on 5.24 million CT and MRI scans provides a diagnostic interpretation that a radiologist accepts. The patient receives treatment based on this diagnosis. Later, it emerges the AI missed a subtle finding that a specialist might have detected. The patient suffers harm. Who is responsible?

• The AI developers, who designed and trained the model?
• The hospital, which implemented the system?
• The radiologist, who relied on the AI's interpretation?
• The treating clinician, who acted on the diagnostic report?

Unlike traditional medical errors, where the chain of causation and responsibility is clearer, AI introduces distributed accountability across multiple actors—some of whom may have minimal medical training.

Competing principles

Beneficence and non-maleficence: AI has genuine potential to improve diagnostic accuracy, speed, and accessibility. Research shows these models can achieve state-of-the-art performance. Refusing to use them might deprive patients of superior care. Yet premature or inappropriate deployment risks harm if errors occur or if clinicians develop over-reliance, eroding their own diagnostic skills.

Autonomy: Should patients be informed when AI contributes to their diagnosis? If so, to what degree? Must they consent to AI-assisted care, or is this simply part of modern medical practice? What about patients who refuse AI involvement—do they have that right, even if it means potentially inferior care?

Justice: AI trained predominantly on data from certain populations may perform poorly on underrepresented groups, potentially exacerbating health inequalities. Who bears responsibility for ensuring algorithmic fairness? Is it ethical to deploy AI knowing it may have differential performance across patient demographics?

The "black box" problem

Many advanced AI models function as "black boxes"—their decision-making processes are opaque even to developers. This creates a fundamental tension with medical accountability, which traditionally requires clinicians to justify their reasoning. If a doctor cannot explain why the AI reached a particular conclusion, how can they fulfil their duty to provide informed, reasoned care?

NHS and GMC context

The GMC's Good Medical Practice states that doctors must "make sure that your conduct justifies your patients' trust in you and the public's trust in the profession." Can clinicians truly justify decisions if they don't fully understand the AI's reasoning?

The NHS's 10 Year Health Plan emphasises AI's potential to transform diagnostics and free clinicians from paperwork. But it also acknowledges the need for accountability frameworks. As the NHS rolls out AI systems, these questions become immediately practical, not merely theoretical.

Discussion points for interviews

• Should we treat AI as a "consultant" offering a second opinion, or as a "tool" like a stethoscope, with the clinician retaining full responsibility?
• Is informed consent needed for AI-assisted diagnosis? What information would patients need to make meaningful decisions?
• How might AI affect the doctor-patient relationship? Could patients feel they're receiving "algorithmic" rather than personalised care?
• What happens when AI recommendations conflict with clinical judgment? Who decides, and on what basis?
• Should there be regulatory frameworks requiring AI models to be explainable, even if this reduces performance?

A balanced view

AI in medicine is not inherently problematic—it offers genuine benefits. But the integration of AI into clinical practice must be accompanied by clear accountability frameworks, transparency about limitations, ongoing monitoring for bias, and preservation of clinician judgment and expertise. The question isn't whether to use AI, but how to integrate it responsibly while maintaining the ethical foundations of medical practice.

For medical applicants, grappling with these questions demonstrates sophisticated ethical reasoning and an understanding that technological advancement must be accompanied by equally sophisticated ethical and regulatory frameworks.

Medical schools increasingly seek applicants who think beyond individual patient encounters to understand healthcare systems. With the NHS's 10 Year Health Plan emphasising transformation across prevention, community care, and digital innovation, systems-level thinking is more relevant than ever at interview.

Here's how to demonstrate this skill authentically.

What is systems-level thinking?

Systems-level thinking means recognising that patient outcomes are shaped not only by individual clinical decisions but by the broader context: resource allocation, workforce planning, care pathways, social determinants of health, and organisational structures. It's understanding that fixing one part of the system can have ripple effects elsewhere.

Why interviewers assess this

The NHS faces unprecedented pressures: waiting lists, workforce shortages, funding constraints, and rising demand. Future doctors need to understand how the system works, identify inefficiencies, and think about sustainable solutions—not just diagnose and treat individual patients.

Interviewers want to see that you:
- Understand healthcare doesn't exist in a vacuum
- Recognise trade-offs and competing priorities
- Appreciate the complexity of implementing change
- Think about prevention, equity, and sustainability

How to demonstrate it authentically

1. Move beyond "more resources" as your default answer

When presented with an NHS challenge—waiting times, staff shortages, health inequalities—avoid immediately jumping to "increase funding" or "hire more staff." While resources matter, this response shows limited engagement with the actual complexity.

Instead, consider:
- Prevention: Could addressing upstream factors reduce demand? (Example: The NHS's shift toward neighbourhood health and "left shift" to community care)
- Efficiency: Are resources being used optimally? (Example: Patient-led follow-up appointments where patients decide if they're necessary)
- Integration: Could better coordination across services improve outcomes? (Example: Integrating hepatitis services into primary care rather than specialist-only delivery)

2. Use real examples from your reading and experience

Don't just state abstract principles—ground them in concrete examples.

Weak response: "The NHS needs to focus more on prevention."

Strong response: "I read about the NHS's genomics population health service, which will sequence 150,000 adult genomes to identify people at highest risk of developing obesity. This represents a shift from reactive treatment to predictive prevention—using genomic insights to intervene early. However, this raises questions about resource allocation: is investing in genomics for a relatively small cohort justified when basic services are stretched? There's a tension between innovation and maintaining core provision."

This shows you've engaged with real NHS developments, understand the prevention agenda, and recognise the ethical and practical trade-offs.

3. Acknowledge complexity and trade-offs

Systems-level thinking means recognising that most decisions involve trade-offs, not clear-cut solutions.

Example scenario: "How would you address A&E overcrowding?"

Systems-level response: "A&E overcrowding often reflects upstream issues—lack of primary care access, delayed hospital discharges due to insufficient social care, and patients using A&E for non-urgent issues because they can't get GP appointments. Addressing this requires coordinated action across multiple sectors: expanding community-based urgent care, improving social care capacity to facilitate timely discharges, and better integration between primary and secondary care. However, each intervention requires resources and time to implement, and there are trade-offs—for example, diverting funding to social care might mean less available for acute services in the short term, even if it reduces demand long-term."

This answer shows you understand root causes, recognise interconnections across sectors, and appreciate that solutions have costs and trade-offs.

4. Connect to broader NHS strategy

Reference current NHS priorities where relevant. The NHS's Medium Term Planning Framework emphasises:
- Shifting care from hospitals to communities (the "left shift")
- Digital transformation and AI
- Reducing health inequalities
- Workforce sustainability
- Integrated care systems (ICSs)

Knowing these strategic priorities allows you to frame your answers within the NHS's actual direction, demonstrating informed engagement rather than abstract theorising.

5. Reflect on your own experiences through a systems lens

When discussing work experience, go beyond describing what you observed to analysing the systemic factors at play.

Weak: "I saw a patient wait six hours in A&E, which showed me the NHS is under pressure."

Strong: "I observed a patient waiting six hours in A&E, which initially seemed like a failing of the emergency department. However, discussing this with staff, I learned the delay was because no medical beds were available—itself caused by delayed discharges waiting for social care packages. This illustrated how A&E performance is often a symptom of bottlenecks elsewhere in the system, and that improving patient flow requires coordination across hospital and community services, not just more A&E capacity."

Practical application

Systems-level thinking doesn't mean having all the answers—it means demonstrating intellectual curiosity, analytical depth, and appreciation for complexity. Interviewers aren't expecting you to solve the NHS's challenges; they want to see that you think thoughtfully about them.

Read widely about current NHS developments, ask "why" and "what are the consequences" when you encounter healthcare challenges, and practice articulating the interconnections between different parts of the system. This skillset will serve you not just at interview, but throughout your medical career.

For more guidance on structuring compelling interview responses that demonstrate depth of thinking, explore our Interview Preparation resources.

With UCAT season approaching, here are three immediately actionable strategies to maximise your score without overwhelming your revision schedule.

1. Front-load Verbal Reasoning—it rewards practice disproportionately

Verbal Reasoning is the UCAT subtest where improvement is most achievable through targeted practice. Unlike Abstract Reasoning (which requires pattern recognition fluency) or Quantitative Reasoning (which depends on calculation speed), Verbal Reasoning rewards strategic approach refinement.

The quick win: Dedicate your first two weeks of UCAT prep to Verbal Reasoning exclusively. Focus on identifying question types (True/False/Can't Tell vs inference-based), learning to scan for keywords efficiently, and resisting the urge to rely on prior knowledge rather than passage content.

Most applicants improve 100-200 scaled score points in Verbal Reasoning with structured practice. This improvement is harder to replicate in other subtests where gains plateau more quickly.

2. Use Decision Making to differentiate yourself

Decision Making has the widest score distribution of any UCAT subtest, meaning strong performance here disproportionately boosts your overall score. Many applicants neglect it because it feels unfamiliar, but this creates opportunity.

The quick win: Master the five core question types: syllogisms, Venn diagrams, probabilistic reasoning, interpreting data/graphs, and evaluating arguments. Each follows predictable patterns. Spend one focused session per question type, learning the underlying logic rather than memorising answers.

Schools like Imperial weight Decision Making highly because it assesses logical reasoning and evidence evaluation—skills central to clinical decision-making. Even a modest percentile improvement here can significantly impact your competitiveness.

3. Simulate test conditions weekly—including the fatigue factor

The UCAT isn't just intellectually demanding; it's a two-hour endurance test requiring sustained concentration under time pressure. Many high-performing applicants underperform on test day because they haven't trained for the psychological and physical demands.

The quick win: From week three of your preparation, sit one full-length UCAT mock under exam conditions every week. Same time of day as your actual test, no breaks, no phone, minimal water. Track not just your scores but your concentration patterns: which subtest do you fade on? When does fatigue hit?

This approach builds stamina and reveals your concentration curve. If you consistently struggle with Quantitative Reasoning as the third subtest, you know to build additional mental reserves for that section on test day.

Bonus: Review your mocks strategically. Don't just check answers—identify why you made errors. Was it time pressure, misreading questions, or conceptual gaps? Each error type requires different corrective strategies.

---

Ready to maximise your UCAT performance? Our UCAT Preparation platform provides timed practice for all five subtests, strategy guides tailored to each question type, and detailed performance analytics to identify exactly where to focus your efforts. And if you're strategising which schools to apply to based on your projected UCAT score, TrueScore predicts the score you'll need to reach interview at every UK medical school using multi-year FOI data.

Imperial College London operates one of Europe's largest medicine departments, with medical campuses across north and west London and partnerships with multiple NHS Trusts, hospitals, and clinics. Here's what applicants need to know.

Entry requirements and admissions

A-level offer: AAA, including Chemistry, Biology, and a third subject (General Studies and Critical Thinking not accepted). If made an offer, you must achieve a pass in the practical endorsement in all science subjects.

IB offer: 38 points overall, with 6 in Biology HL and 6 in Chemistry HL.

Admissions test: UCAT is required. You must take it in the year you apply, and only once per admissions cycle.

Interview format: Imperial uses Multiple Mini Interviews (MMIs), conducted both in-person and online. The MMI format assesses evidence of commitment to NHS values, motivation and understanding of medicine, empathy and resilience, community activities, leadership and teamwork, and extracurricular interests. Your UCAS personal statement and referee's report will be reviewed during the interview process.

Contextual admissions: If you have Home fee status and meet specific criteria (care leaver, Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile one postcode, Free School Meals recipient, or attendance at a school with below-average progression to higher education), you may be eligible for guaranteed interview, a guaranteed minimum offer, and extra transition support.

Application deadline: Standard UCAS medical deadline (15 October).

Curriculum structure

Imperial's newly redeveloped curriculum integrates technological developments in education and healthcare with expectations of modern NHS practice. Teaching is enriched by internationally competitive research and clinical expertise.

Key features:
- Integrated MBBS/BSc: All students graduate with both an MBBS and a BSc qualification (this is sometimes referred to as intercalation, though it's integrated rather than an additional year). Exceptional students may be offered the opportunity to include a PhD.
- Early clinical exposure: The curriculum emphasises early patient contact and clinical skills training from the outset.
- Case-based learning: Scientific knowledge is integrated and translated to clinical care through case-based modules, with each building on the last in depth and complexity.
- Research skills focus: Phase two emphasises application of research skills, preparing students for evidence-based practice.
- Associateship: In addition to your MBBS, you receive the Associateship of the Imperial College School of Medicine (AICSM).

Clinical placements

Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust offers over 3,000 placements each year to Imperial medical students in years three, five, and six. You'll train across multiple NHS sites in north and west London, gaining exposure to diverse patient populations and clinical settings.

The Trust manages 46 postgraduate teaching programmes and supports over 800 trainees annually, reflecting the strength of its educational infrastructure.

Teaching quality and reputation

Imperial achieved Gold in the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) 2023 and was named University of the Year for Graduate Employment 2026 by The Times and Sunday Times.

Imperial is consistently ranked in the global top 10 by QS, the Guardian, and Times Higher Education. According to REF 2021, Imperial is home to a greater proportion of world-leading research than any other UK university.

What makes Imperial distinctive?

1. Research intensity: Imperial's medicine programme is deeply embedded within a world-leading research university. You'll learn from clinicians and scientists at the forefront of biomedical innovation, with opportunities to engage in cutting-edge research through the Enterprise Lab (supporting 2,000+ students annually) and research partnerships.

2. Location: Based in London, you have access to some of the UK's leading hospitals and a global hub for life sciences, technology, and entrepreneurship. The university's partnerships span Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, multiple specialist hospitals, and research institutes.

3. Technology-forward curriculum: Imperial's curriculum explicitly incorporates technological advances in healthcare delivery, preparing students for the digital, AI-enhanced NHS of the future. This includes exposure to innovations like robotic surgery, ambient voice technology, and virtual care.

4. Integrated undergraduate-postgraduate pathway: With extensive postgraduate teaching programmes on-site, you'll be immersed in a culture of continuous learning and have clear visibility into specialist training pathways.

What Imperial looks for

Imperial adopts a holistic admissions approach, with all applicants individually assessed using their application, UCAT score, and interview performance. The contextual admissions approach means selectors consider additional barriers you may face that affect your ability to demonstrate potential through grades alone.

Imperial particularly values:
- Clear motivation for medicine articulated in your personal statement
- NHS values alignment: Understanding of and commitment to NHS Constitution principles
- Resilience and empathy: Evidence of these qualities through experiences and reflection
- Intellectual curiosity: Engagement with scientific and medical topics beyond the curriculum
- Community contribution: Leadership, teamwork, and extracurricular breadth

How to strengthen your application

UCAT performance matters: Imperial uses UCAT scores as part of its selection process. Strong performance, particularly in Decision Making and Verbal Reasoning, can significantly strengthen your application. Use UCAT Preparation resources to maximise your score, and check TrueScore to understand the score needed to be competitive.

Personal statement depth: Imperial looks for clear motivation and genuine understanding of medicine as a career. Go beyond listing experiences—demonstrate reflection, insight, and intellectual engagement. Our Personal Statement Help includes annotated examples and structured review.

MMI preparation is essential: Imperial's MMI format assesses multiple competencies across different stations. Practice discussing ethical scenarios, demonstrating empathy and communication skills, and articulating your motivation under timed conditions. Our Interview Preparation covers MMI station types, model answers, and role-play scenarios.

Work experience quality over quantity: Imperial values reflective, meaningful engagement with healthcare settings over simply accumulating hours. Use our Work Experience Guidance to maximise the impact of your experiences in your application.

Strategic considerations

Imperial is highly competitive, with AAA required and strong UCAT performance expected. When building your UCAS strategy, consider how Imperial fits within your four choices.

• *If you have strong predicted grades (AAA or higher) and confident UCAT performance**: Imperial is a strong choice, offering world-class research, London location, and excellent graduate employment outcomes.
• If your grades/UCAT are borderline: Ensure you have at least one school with slightly lower entry requirements as insurance.
• Contextual applicants: If you meet Imperial's widening participation criteria, guaranteed interview consideration significantly improves your chances.

Use our Application Strategy guidance to optimise your school selection, and consult our Medical School Rankings to compare Imperial against other schools on entry requirements, teaching quality, and outcomes.

Final thoughts

Imperial College London offers an exceptional medical education characterised by research excellence, technological innovation, and location in one of the world's leading cities for life sciences. The integrated MBBS/BSc, early clinical exposure, and strong NHS partnerships create a rigorous, future-focused training environment.

For applicants who thrive in research-intensive settings, value technological advancement in medicine, and want to be part of a globally recognised institution, Imperial is an outstanding choice—provided you can meet its competitive entry requirements and demonstrate the intellectual curiosity, resilience, and NHS values alignment the school prioritises.

Ready to build your Imperial application? Book a 1:1 Consultation with an NGMP advisor to create your personalised strategy, or explore our comprehensive Interview Preparation to master Imperial's MMI format.