↓ Skip to main content

EGFR heterogeneity and implications for therapeutic intervention in glioblastoma

Overview of attention for article published in Neuro-Oncology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
220 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.
Article details
Title
EGFR heterogeneity and implications for therapeutic intervention in glioblastoma
Published in
Neuro-Oncology, October 2017
DOI 10.1093/neuonc/nox191
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Patients with glioblastoma (GBM) have a universally poor prognosis and are in urgent need of effective treatment strategies. Recent advances in sequencing techniques unraveled the complete genomic landscape of GBMs and revealed profound heterogeneity of individual tumors even at the single cell level. Genomic profiling has detected epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene alterations in more than half of GBMs. Major genetic events include amplification and mutation of EGFR. Yet, treatment strategies targeting EGFR have thus far failed in clinical trials. In this review, we discuss the clonal and functional heterogeneity of EGFRs in GBM development and critically reassess the potential of EGFRs as therapeutic targets.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 220 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 220 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 10%
Student > Bachelor 21 10%
Researcher 20 9%
Student > Master 16 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 22 10%
Unknown 103 47%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 43 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 13%
Neuroscience 10 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 4%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 103 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 29 June 2021.
All research outputs
#6,201,515
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from Neuro-Oncology
#836
of 3,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,171
of 325,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuro-Oncology
#26
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,302 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 325,155 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 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 67% of its contemporaries.