"We hypothesise that the SARS‐CoV‐2 infection triggered an anti‐tumour immune response, as has been described with other infections in the context of high‐grade non‐Hodgkin lymphoma."
That suggests this has happened before and is not specific to this particular virus. Seems like an odd omission when you're after "the whole basis of the article".
It’d be pretty useless to only research and document phenomena that you already understand. But in case it seems that odd to you, here’s 16 other cases of cancer that went into remission after a viral infection:
My intention was to narrow my quotes around the elements that illustrated my point. I didn't mean to misrepresent what they were saying, thanks for stepping up and providing more context.
In spite of this, I still believe that the title is strongly misleading.
"We hypothesise that the SARS‐CoV‐2 infection triggered an anti‐tumour immune response, as has been described with other infections in the context of high‐grade non‐Hodgkin lymphoma."
That suggests this has happened before and is not specific to this particular virus. Seems like an odd omission when you're after "the whole basis of the article".