↓ Skip to main content

Oncolytic viruses: emerging options for the treatment of breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Oncology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
Title
Oncolytic viruses: emerging options for the treatment of breast cancer
Published in
Medical Oncology, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12032-017-0899-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yogesh R. Suryawanshi, Tiantian Zhang, Karim Essani

Abstract

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common type of cancer among women and is the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths, following lung cancer. Severe toxicity associated with a long-term use of BC chemo- and radiotherapy makes it essential to look for newer therapeutics. Additionally, molecular heterogeneity at both intratumoral and intertumoral levels among BC subtypes is known to result in a differential response to standard therapeutics. Oncolytic viruses (OVs) have emerged as one of the most promising treatment options for BC. Many preclinical and clinical studies have shown that OVs are effective in treating BC, both as a single therapeutic agent and as a part of combination therapies. Combination therapies involving multimodal therapeutics including OVs are becoming popular as they allow to achieve the synergistic therapeutic effects, while minimizing the associated toxicities. Here, we review the OVs for BC therapy in preclinical studies and in clinical trials, both as a monotherapy and as part of a combination therapy. We also briefly discuss the potential therapeutic targets for BC, as these are likely to be critical for the development of new OVs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 22%
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 12 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 13 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,590,632
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Medical Oncology
#210
of 1,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,392
of 422,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Oncology
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,317 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 422,096 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 69% 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 68% of its contemporaries.