↓ Skip to main content

Papillary and neuroendocrine breast lesions: the WHO stance

Overview of attention for article published in Histopathology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
109 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Papillary and neuroendocrine breast lesions: the WHO stance
Published in
Histopathology, January 2015
DOI 10.1111/his.12463
Pubmed ID
Authors

Puay Hoon Tan, Stuart J Schnitt, Marc J van de Vijver, Ian O Ellis, Sunil R Lakhani

Abstract

In this review, we highlight adaptations in the WHO 2012 classification of papillary and neuroendocrine breast lesions as compared with the previous 2003 version. Consensus criteria for distinguishing atypical ductal hyperplasia from ductal carcinoma in situ within an intraductal papilloma are proposed. The absence of myoepithelial cells around the wall of an encapsulated papillary carcinoma, although raising consideration of an indolent tumour with minimal invasion, is currently regarded as in-situ disease for staging purposes. The majority of solid papillary carcinomas are classified as in-situ tumours, but lesions with irregular tumour islands within desmoplastic stroma may be considered to be invasive. The diagnosis of solid papillary carcinoma without further qualification as either in-situ or invasive disease is discouraged. When invasive papillary carcinoma is seen in the breast, metastatic papillary carcinoma from other organ sites needs to be excluded. WHO 2012 classifies neuroendocrine breast tumours as well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumour, small-cell carcinoma, and invasive breast carcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation. There is currently no clinical impact of identifying neuroendocrine differentiation in conventional invasive breast carcinomas, apart from acknowledging its frequent occurrence in subtypes such as the hypercellular variant of mucinous carcinoma and solid papillary carcinoma.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 12 16%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 11%
Professor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 20 26%
Unknown 18 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 59%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 23 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 January 2016.
All research outputs
#14,644,315
of 24,558,777 outputs
Outputs from Histopathology
#2,101
of 3,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,894
of 361,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Histopathology
#68
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,558,777 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,414 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 361,419 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.