8 measurements spanning 20 days, net -17. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 5,520–5,543 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
27 Aug 2026, 13:25
5,523
-1
24 Aug 2026, 22:15
5,524
-5
20 Aug 2026, 22:54
5,529
-1
17 Aug 2026, 19:45
5,530
-4
14 Aug 2026, 10:15
5,534
-1
10 Aug 2026, 21:41
5,535
-5
7 Aug 2026, 06:00
5,540
no change
7 Aug 2026, 05:51
5,540
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 30 March 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 8 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 27 July 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Reaction mix
455 reactions across 20 posts, in 11 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 44.4% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
202
44.4%
🔥
96
21.1%
🥰
73
16.0%
👍
27
5.93%
❤🔥
20
4.40%
👏
14
3.08%
🤯
13
2.86%
😁
4
0.879%
🙏
3
0.659%
🤪
2
0.44%
💊
1
0.22%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 455reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 30 March 2026 to 27 July 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 20 we hold a reading for · 5%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @drisma1l. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 30 March 2026 to 27 July 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Откуда вообще взялась консолидирующая лучевая терапия при распространенном мелкоклеточном раке легкого?
Если углубиться в историю вопроса, окажется интересная деталь.
На самом деле, убедительной доказательной базы у этой стратегии никогда не было.
Ключевым исследованием, благодаря которому консолидирующая лучевая терапия вошла в клинические рекомендации, стало исследование CREST. Но есть один нюанс: формально оно …
Наверное, самое сложное в работе врача-онколога — это умение сохранять качество жизни своих пациентов.
И я имею в виду не столько сопроводительную терапию, сколько способность вовремя остановиться.
Речь здесь не о том, когда исчерпаны все варианты лечения, а о моментах, когда цена очередной линии терапии становится слишком высокой для самого человека.
И в таких ситуациях иногда самое трудное решение — не назначить…
Видимо, теперь у нас новый таргетный препарат при НМРЛ KRAS G12C mut. - Диварасиб.
Компания Roche анонсировала положительные результаты исследования 3 фазы, в котором таргетный препарат нового поколения (Диварасиб) сравнивали с уже одобренными соторасибом и адаграсибом.
В анонсе обещают клинически значимое улучшение ВБП и ОВ у предлеченных пациентов.
Ждем.
За время работы в Хадассе я выделил для себя несколько вещей, которые действительно отличают нашу клинику.
🔹 Скорость.
Иногда пациент приезжает утром натощак только с готовым материалом для исследования, а к вечеру уже успевает пройти КТ с описанием, установить порт и начать лечение. Некоторые генетические исследования при этом могут быть готовы всего за несколько часов.
🔹 Консилиумы без давления авторитетом.
Здесь…
Каждый раз, когда вижу подобные схемы лечения ТНРМЖ, возникает только один вопрос: кто назначает PARP-ингибиторы в первой линии и насколько часто это происходит в реальной практике? 🧐
Дараксонрасиб заполонил все информационное поле зарубежного интернета связанного с онкологией.
Все в положительном ключе считают этот препарат Революцией в онкологии.
Капивасертиб не увеличивает ОВ.
В целом исследование с алпелисибом тоже провальное, тут была надежда, но не сработало 🤷🏻♂️
❤6👍6❤🔥5
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @drisma1l. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Polls
The 2 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
ES-SCLC:
По МРТ головного мозга нет признаков вторичного поражения, дальнейшая тактика ведения ?
PCI18%
МРТ каждые 3 месяца85%
The shares total 103%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
ES-SCLC:
После проведения основной части 1-ой линии терапии в грудной клетке нет признаков остаточной опухоли: будете ли проводить консолидирующую лучевую терапию ?
Нет30%
Да72%
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 30 March 2026 to 27 July 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Forward network
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
Максим Кузнецов - Врач эндокринолог @medic_smith · 147,227 Telegram ranks this channel #59 of 98 here — alongside 97 others — read 13 August 2026
Клинфарм замес | Евгений Никитин @tgnikitin · 44,801 Telegram ranks this channel #64 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 28 August 2026
Дерматология Быканова @dr_bykanov · 62,527 Telegram ranks this channel #81 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 21 August 2026
Медицинская Россия @mediamedics · 143,184 Telegram ranks this channel #93 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 13 August 2026
This channel appears in 4 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 27 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Злокачественные будни” (@drisma1l), 5,523 subscribers as measured 27 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/drisma1l.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.
