↓ Skip to main content

Role of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of free circulating DNA in the management of patients with non-small cell lung cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular Oncology, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Role of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of free circulating DNA in the management of patients with non-small cell lung cancer
Published in
Cellular Oncology, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s13402-013-0155-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paola Ulivi, Rosella Silvestrini

Abstract

The release of DNA into peripheral blood is a common event in cancer patients, occurring as a consequence of necrotic and apoptotic processes typical of tumor cells. However, free circulating DNA (fcDNA) is also present in patients with benign diseases and in healthy individuals. Both quantitative and qualitative aspects of fcDNA have been studied as potential biomarkers in a number of tumor types. In particular, quantitative analysis of fcDNA has been shown to play an important role in the diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), because of its ability to discriminate between healthy subjects and individuals with NSCLC. Additionally, fcDNA in cancer patients derives predominantly from tumor tissue and, as such, it can be used for the molecular characterization of the primary tumor. Targeted therapies in NSCLC have, in recent years, produced promising results, highlighting the importance of molecular profiling of the primary cancer lesions. Considering that little or no tumor material is available for at least some of the patients, the possibility of using fcDNA for molecular analysis becomes increasingly important. In the present review we evaluated several quantitative and qualitative aspects of fcDNA that could be instrumental for the differential diagnosis of lung disease.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 30%
Researcher 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 4 13%
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 18 December 2013.
All research outputs
#19,516,978
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from Cellular Oncology
#259
of 426 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,429
of 217,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular Oncology
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 426 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 217,854 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.