Following this puts new work involving it at the top of your briefing, with a note saying why it is there. Links are taken from the source record, never inferred.
This is a narrative review that raises questions and summarizes progress rather than reporting empirical results with effect sizes or comparative outcomes to answer them.
This is a narrative review or commentary describing the concept and theoretical promise of tolerogenic vaccines without reporting original experimental data, efficacy results, or clinical outcomes.
An expert interview on vaccine design principles and adjuvant strategy; informative for research direction but not empirical evidence of clinical efficacy or safety.
A critical narrative review synthesizing evidence across AI-genomics applications for infectious disease surveillance, identifying methodological gaps and recommending governance priorities rather than reporting new empirical results.
A narrative review synthesizing current evidence on personalized cancer vaccine development, proposing a framework for future optimization rather than reporting original empirical findings.
A narrative review synthesizing the state of knowledge on personalized vaccine platforms for non-communicable diseases, offering a conceptual framework rather than original evidence of efficacy.
A narrative review summarizing neoantigen identification strategies and discussing challenges; raises questions about mechanistic pathways rather than reporting empirical results with effect sizes.
Single-centre mechanistic study of three TCR constructs using multimodal profiling with in vivo tumour modelling; identifies functional hierarchy but lacks comparative efficacy statistics, power calculation, or clinical translation.