The notion that oncologists could boost immunotherapy responses simply by giving infusions in the morning, rather than late afternoon, is an attractive one. So when a clinical trial published in Nature Medicine this month showed that lung cancer patients treated in the morning had a massive reduction in the risk of progression compared to those treated in the afternoon, many scientists were intrigued, if skeptical.

Now that study is coming under fire, as multiple scientists and sleuths raise serious concerns about the data and point out inconsistencies in the trial.

These have called the study’s conclusions even further into question, which experts told STAT already lacked strong biological plausibility, and Nature Medicine appended a note on the study on Thursday that it is starting an investigation into the concerns.

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

© Jenny Kane/AP

arXiv:2602.16729v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We systematically evaluate the quality of widely used AI safety datasets from two perspectives: in isolation and in practice. In isolation, we examine how well these datasets reflect real-world attacks based on three key properties: driven by ulterior intent, well-crafted, and out-of-distribution. We find that these datasets overrely on "triggering cues": words or phrases with overt negative/sensitive connotations that are intended to trigger safety mechanisms explicitly, which is unrealistic compared to real-world attacks. In practice, we evaluate whether these datasets genuinely measure safety risks or merely provoke refusals through triggering cues. To explore this, we introduce "intent laundering": a procedure that abstracts away triggering cues from attacks (data points) while strictly preserving their malicious intent and all relevant details. Our results indicate that current AI safety datasets fail to faithfully represent real-world attacks due to their overreliance on triggering cues. In fact, once these cues are removed, all previously evaluated "reasonably safe" models become unsafe, including Gemini 3 Pro and Claude Sonnet 3.7. Moreover, when intent laundering is adapted as a jailbreaking technique, it consistently achieves high attack success rates, ranging from 90% to over 98%, under fully black-box access. Overall, our findings expose a significant disconnect between how model safety is evaluated and how real-world adversaries behave.

npj Digital Medicine, Published online: 20 February 2026; doi:10.1038/s41746-026-02441-8

CancerLLM: a large language model in cancer domain

A blood test for detecting cancer early being developed by the diagnostics firm Grail failed to meet its main goal in a giant study being conducted with England’s National Health Service, the company said Thursday.

Grail’s test has been the standard bearer for new technologies that promise a blood test can be used to detect many different types of cancer early and eventually even to indicate to scientists where in the body to look for tumors. The company already sells its test, called Galleri, for a list price of $1,000, although it is not yet approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Grail said Thursday it sold 185,000 tests in 2025, generating $136.8 million. 

The company’s shares were down 47% in after-hours trading.

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

© Adobe