An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
StatPearls [Internet].
Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2026 Jan-.
Top results in this bookTable of Contents
Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet].
York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.
Holland-Frei Cancer Medicine. 6th edition.
Kufe DW, Pollock RE, Weichselbaum RR, et al., editors.
Hamilton (ON): BC Decker; 2003.
PDQ Cancer Information Summaries [Internet].
Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute (US); 2002-.
Endotext [Internet].
Feingold KR, Adler RA, Ahmed SF, et al., editors.
South Dartmouth (MA): MDText.com, Inc.; 2000-.
Bladder Cancer: Diagnosis and Management.
National Collaborating Centre for Cancer (UK).
London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2015 Feb. (NICE Guideline, No. 2.)
Molecular Imaging and Contrast Agent Database (MICAD) [Internet].
Bethesda (MD): National Center for Biotechnology Information (US); 2004-2013.
WHO Guidelines for the Pharmacological and Radiotherapeutic Management of Cancer Pain in Adults and Adolescents.
Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018.
Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy [Internet].
Tipton KN, Sullivan N, Bruening W, et al.
Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011 May. (Comparative Effectiveness Technical Briefs, No. 6.)
Diagnosis and Management of Metastatic Malignant Disease of Unknown Primary Origin.
Cardiff (UK): National Collaborating Centre for Cancer (UK); 2010 Jul. (NICE Clinical Guidelines, No. 104.)
Rational treatment selection for primary Merkel Cell Carcinoma: a Rational MCC RCT comparing surgery and radiotherapy with parallel observational study.
Steven NM, Pirrie S, Jefferson-Hulme Y, et al.
Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; 2025 Dec. (Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation, No. 12.12.)
Radiotherapy Treatments for Head and Neck Cancer Update [Internet].
Ratko TA, Douglas GW, de Souza JA, et al.
Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2014 Dec. (Comparative Effectiveness Review, No. 144.)
InformedHealth.org [Internet].
Cologne, Germany: Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG); 2006-.
An international randomised controlled trial to compare TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT) with conventional postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for women with early-stage breast cancer (the TARGIT-A trial).
Vaidya JS, Wenz F, Bulsara M, et al.
Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2016 Sep. (Health Technology Assessment, No. 20.73.)
Madame Curie Bioscience Database [Internet].
Austin (TX): Landes Bioscience; 2000-2013.
Partial Breast Irradiation for Breast Cancer [Internet].
Shumway DA, Corbin KS, Farah MH, et al.
Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2023 Jan. (Comparative Effectiveness Review, No. 259.)
GeneReviews® [Internet].
Adam MP, Bick S, Mirzaa GM, et al., editors.
Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993-2026.
The INTRABEAM® Photon Radiotherapy System for the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
Picot J, Copley V, Colquitt JL, et al.
Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2015 Aug. (Health Technology Assessment, No. 19.69.)
Evidence reviews for the investigation, management and follow-up of glioma: Brain tumours (primary) and brain metastases in adults: Evidence Report A.
National Guideline Alliance (UK).
London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2018 Jul. (NICE Guideline, No. 99.)
The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (epoetin and darbepoetin) for treating cancer treatment-induced anaemia (including review of technology appraisal no. 142): a systematic review and economic model.
Crathorne L, Huxley N, Haasova M, et al.
Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2016 Feb. (Health Technology Assessment, No. 20.13.)
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
Turn recording back on