↓ Skip to main content

Predicting clinical outcomes in chordoma patients receiving immunotherapy: a comparison between volumetric segmentation and RECIST

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
Title
Predicting clinical outcomes in chordoma patients receiving immunotherapy: a comparison between volumetric segmentation and RECIST
Published in
BMC Cancer, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2699-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathleen E. Fenerty, Les R. Folio, Nicholas J. Patronas, Jennifer L. Marté, James L. Gulley, Christopher R. Heery

Abstract

The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) are the current standard for evaluating disease progression or therapy response in patients with solid tumors. RECIST 1.1 calls for axial, longest-diameter (or perpendicular short axis of lymph nodes) measurements of a maximum of five tumors, which limits clinicians' ability to adequately measure disease burden, especially in patients with irregularly shaped tumors. This is especially problematic in chordoma, a disease for which RECIST does not always adequately capture disease burden because chordoma tumors are typically irregularly shaped and slow-growing. Furthermore, primary chordoma tumors tend to be adjacent to vital structures in the skull or sacrum that, when compressed, lead to significant clinical consequences. Volumetric segmentation is a newer technology that allows tumor burden to be measured in three dimensions on either MR or CT. Here, we compared the ability of RECIST measurements and tumor volumes to predict clinical outcomes in a cohort of 21 chordoma patients receiving immunotherapy. There was a significant difference in radiologic time to progression Kaplan-Meier curves between clinical outcome groups using volumetric segmentation (P = 0.012) but not RECIST (P = 0.38). In several cases, changes in volume were earlier and more sensitive reflections of clinical status. RECIST is a useful evaluation method when obvious changes are occurring in patients with chordoma. However, in many cases, RECIST does not detect small changes, and volumetric assessment was capable of detecting changes and predicting clinical outcome earlier than RECIST. Although this study was small and retrospective, we believe our results warrant further research in this area.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 10 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 45%
Computer Science 2 7%
Neuroscience 2 7%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Unknown 11 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2019.
All research outputs
#6,341,508
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,578
of 8,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,570
of 344,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#31
of 253 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,530 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 253 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.