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.
Rigorous meta-analysis of 8 RCTs with reconstructed individual patient data and quantitative time-to-benefit modelling provides robust evidence on treatment duration, though findings are primarily analytical rather than from a new primary trial.
Preclinical in vitro and xenograft study proposing a mechanism by which an existing drug may enhance chemotherapy, without clinical efficacy data or human evidence.
This is a mechanistic review summarizing preclinical evidence linking TMEM97/sigma-2 receptor to endocrine resistance pathways; the source explicitly states evidence remains preclinical and further investigation is needed.
A narrative review synthesizing observational and meta-analytic evidence on drug–ICI interactions, offering clinical recommendations on statin, PPI, and corticosteroid use during checkpoint inhibitor therapy, but not reporting new primary data.
In vitro mechanistic study demonstrating enhanced probiotic metabolite activity against colorectal cancer cells and angiogenesis, but lacking in vivo efficacy data, clinical endpoints, or human translation.
A single-centre, underpowered cross-sectional pilot study explicitly designed as hypothesis-generating, with a null primary finding that the authors acknowledge cannot rule out a clinically meaningful effect.
A synthesis paper proposing mechanistic hypotheses for perineural invasion in HCC based on limited and inconsistently defined clinical data, without new experimental results or clinical trials to test the proposed mechanisms.
Single-centre prospective observational study over 9 weeks with small absolute number of events (n=7) reporting incidence rate; descriptive rather than comparative, and lacks control or mechanistic depth to support generalization.