↓ Skip to main content

Relapse assessment following allogeneic SCT in patients with MDS and AML

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Hematology, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Relapse assessment following allogeneic SCT in patients with MDS and AML
Published in
Annals of Hematology, March 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00277-014-2046-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maximilian Christopeit, Nicolaus Kröger, Torsten Haferlach, Ulrike Bacher

Abstract

Options to pre-emptively treat impending relapse of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) continuously increase. In recent years, the spectrum of diagnostic methods and parameters to perform post-transplant monitoring in patients with AML and MDS has grown. Cytomorphology, histomorphology, and chimaerism analysis are the mainstay in any panel of post-transplant monitoring. This may be individually combined with multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) for the detection of residual cells with a leukaemia phenotype and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) to assess gene expression, e.g., of WT1 or the residual mutation load (e.g., in case of an NPM1 mutation). Data evaluating the aforementioned methods alone or in combination are discussed in this review with particular emphasis on data pointing towards their suitability to steer pre-emptive post-transplant interventions such as immunotherapy, chemotherapy or therapy with demethylating agents.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Other 7 25%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 21%
Engineering 2 7%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 December 2014.
All research outputs
#13,332,065
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Hematology
#889
of 2,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,377
of 224,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Hematology
#10
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,164 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 224,544 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 58% of its contemporaries.