| Title |
10 rare tumors that warrant a genetics referral
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Familial Cancer, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10689-012-9584-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kimberly C. Banks, Jessica J. Moline, Monica L. Marvin, Anna C. Newlin, Kristen J. Vogel |
| Abstract |
The number of described cancer susceptibility syndromes continues to grow, as does our knowledge on how to manage these syndromes with the aim of early detection and cancer prevention. Oncologists now have greater responsibility to recognize patterns of cancer that warrant referral for a genetics consultation. While some patterns of common cancers are easy to recognize as related to hereditary cancer syndromes, there are a number of rare tumors that are highly associated with cancer syndromes yet are often overlooked given their infrequency. We present a review of ten rare tumors that are strongly associated with hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes: adrenocortical carcinoma, carcinoid tumors, diffuse gastric cancer, fallopian tube/primary peritoneal cancer, leiomyosarcoma, medullary thyroid cancer, paraganglioma/pheochromocytoma, renal cell carcinoma of chromophobe, hybrid oncocytoic, or oncocytoma histology, sebaceous carcinoma, and sex cord tumors with annular tubules. This review will serve as a guide for oncologists to assist in the recognition of rare tumors that warrant referral for a genetic consultation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 36% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 44% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 16% |
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 08 May 2017.
All research outputs
#7,009,134
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Familial Cancer
#145
of 636 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,329
of 292,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Familial Cancer
#7
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 636 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 292,594 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.