The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
I look at and I will then look at that and then say okay this patient on paper perhaps has an X or Y or Z but the the the molecular phenotype of the tumor is favorable or it's not favorable I'm going to alter what I recommend to the patient based on that so that's how I interpret it it's kind of experimental use only so to speak
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.