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.
A retrospective single-center study using cross-validation in a small, heterogeneous cohort (152 patients, split by treatment) that reports surrogate endpoints (AUC) rather than clinical outcomes; radiomic findings did not improve on baseline models, limiting clinical utility.
A real-world retrospective study of adequate size showing encouraging efficacy (ORR 55.6%, 12-month OS 92.1%) with manageable toxicity in R/M cervical cancer, but lacking a control arm and requiring prospective validation.
Single-centre retrospective measurement study with no clinical outcome; demonstrates a technical phenomenon (tissue shrinkage) but lacks comparison to patient safety or oncological adequacy thresholds.
Retrospective propensity-matched cohort study showing no difference in overall survival between radiation regimens in total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer, confirming equipoise between approaches already in clinical use.
A single case report with no comparator, control group, or quantified efficacy metrics; describes feasibility and tolerability rather than establishing efficacy through controlled evidence.
A narrative review article summarizing mechanisms, resistance pathways, and emerging therapeutic strategies in GI cancer immunotherapy without presenting original clinical trial data or original research findings.
This is a narrative review synthesizing current evidence on ICI-related GI toxicity pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management, guided by expert consensus rather than new primary data.
A rigorous meta-analysis of 13 studies (including 3 RCTs) with clear primary outcomes and adequate pooling; no overall survival benefit but significant local recurrence reduction supports selective rather than routine use in upper rectal cancer.