| Title |
Surgical Outcomes of Isolated Malignant Pulmonary Nodules in Patients with a History of Breast Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-017-6067-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zuodong Song, Ting Ye, Longfei Ma, Jiaqing Xiang, Haiquan Chen |
| Abstract |
The role of surgery for isolated malignant pulmonary nodules in breast cancer patients remains unclear. A total of 1286 consecutive breast cancer patients with pulmonary nodules detected by thoracic computed tomography (CT) or positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scan at Shanghai Cancer Center, Fudan University, were reviewed. Overall, 147 breast cancer patients with isolated malignant pulmonary nodules receiving surgery and/or chemotherapy were enrolled in the study. Patients were classified into three groups: patients with primary lung cancer (PLC) receiving surgery (Group 1), patients with lung metastasis receiving surgery (Group 2), and patients with lung metastasis receiving chemotherapy (Group 3). Survival outcomes, including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), were analyzed for patients in all three groups, and prognostic factors for PFS for patients with pulmonary metastasis were evaluated. Patients with PLC receiving surgery had better survival outcomes, including OS and PFS, than patients with lung metastases who received surgical resection. Breast cancer patients with solitary lung metastasis who received metastasectomy had a significantly better PFS than those who did not; however, no statistically significant difference in OS was observed between the two groups. A multivariate analysis conducted in patients with isolated metastatic breast cancer showed that surgery was an independent factor for better PFS. Surgery should be considered a valid option for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer patients presenting with isolated malignant lung nodules. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 36% |
| Mexico | 2 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 73% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
| Scientists | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 18% |
| Researcher | 3 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 18% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 59% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 September 2017.
All research outputs
#4,650,171
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#1,498
of 6,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,894
of 316,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#45
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,530 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 316,385 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 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 56% of its contemporaries.