↓ Skip to main content

Clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with mantle cell lymphoma. Recommendations from the GEL/TAMO Spanish Cooperative Group

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Hematology, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with mantle cell lymphoma. Recommendations from the GEL/TAMO Spanish Cooperative Group
Published in
Annals of Hematology, May 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00277-013-1783-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dolores Caballero, Elías Campo, Armando López-Guillermo, Alejandro Martín, Reyes Arranz-Sáez, Eva Giné, Andrés López, Eva González-Barca, Miguel Ángel Canales, Marcos González-Díaz, Alberto Orfao

Abstract

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is considered a distinct type of B-cell lymphoma genetically characterized by the t(11;14) translocation and cyclin D1 overexpression. There is also a small subset of tumors negative for cyclin D1 expression that are morphologically and immunophenotypically indistinguishable from conventional MCL. Although in the last decades, the median overall survival of patients with MCL has improved significantly, it is still considered as one of the poorest prognoses diseases among B-cell lymphomas. Election of treatment for patients with MCL is complex due to the scarcity of solid evidence. Current available data shows that conventional chemotherapy does not yield satisfactory results as in other types of B-cell lymphomas. However, the role of other approaches such as autologous or allogenic stem cell transplantation, immunotherapy, the administration of consolidation or maintenance schedules, or the use of targeted therapies still lack clear indications. In view of this situation, the Spanish Group of Lymphomas/Autologous Bone Marrow Transplantation has conducted a series of reviews on different aspects of MCL, namely its diagnosis, prognosis, first-line and salvage treatment (both in young and elderly patients), new targeted therapies, and detection of minimal residual disease. On the basis of the available evidence, a series of recommendations have been issued with the intention of providing guidance to clinicians on the diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of patients with MCL.

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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 25%
Other 9 18%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 8 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 October 2013.
All research outputs
#15,281,593
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Hematology
#1,128
of 2,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,210
of 195,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Hematology
#18
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,163 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 195,198 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.