↓ Skip to main content

Immunotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer: report from an international experts panel meeting of the Italian association of thoracic oncology

Overview of attention for article published in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Immunotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer: report from an international experts panel meeting of the Italian association of thoracic oncology
Published in
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, September 2016
DOI 10.1080/14712598.2016.1234602
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cesare Gridelli, Paolo A. Ascierto, Massimo C.P. Barberis, Enriqueta Felip, Edward B Garon, Mary O’brien, Suresh Senan, Francesca Casaluce, Assunta Sgambato, Vali Papadimitrakopoulou, Filippo De Marinis

Abstract

The potential long term survival gain, related to immune adaptability and memory, the potential activity across multiple tumour types through targeting the immune system, and the opportunity for combinations offered by the unique mechanism of actions and safety profile of these new agents, all support the role of immunotherapy in the cancer treatment pathway or paradigm. The authors discuss the recent advances in the understanding of immunology and antitumor immune responses that have led to the development of new immunotherapies, including monoclonal antibodies that inhibit immune checkpoint pathways, such as Programmed Death-1 (PD-1) and Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte-Associated Antigen 4 (CTLA-4). Currently, two PD-1 inhibitors are available in clinical practice for treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Ongoing research will dictate future strategies, including the potential incorporation of immunotherapy in stage dependent treatment settings (early stage locally advanced disease and first line therapy for metastatic disease). Immunotherapy combinations are promising avenues, and careful selection of patients, doses of each agent and information supporting strategies (i.e. concomitant or sequential) is still needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Postgraduate 7 13%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 47%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Psychology 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 13 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,444,876
of 23,923,788 outputs
Outputs from Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy
#1,377
of 1,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,317
of 324,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy
#12
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,923,788 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,935 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 324,222 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.