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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Circulating tumor cells in newly diagnosed inflammatory breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Breast Cancer Research, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13058-014-0507-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michal Mego, Antonio Giordano, Ugo De Giorgi, Hiroko Masuda, Limin Hsu, Mario Giuliano, Tamer M Fouad, Shaheenah Dawood, Naoto T Ueno, Vicente Valero, Eleni Andreopoulou, Ricardo H Alvarez, Wendy A Woodward, Gabriel N Hortobagyi, Massimo Cristofanilli, James M Reuben |
| Abstract |
IntroductionCirculating tumor cells (CTCs) are an independent prognostic factor for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is one of the most aggressive forms of breast cancer. The prognostic value of a CTC count in newly diagnosed IBC has not been established. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of a baseline CTC count in patients with newly diagnosed IBC.MethodsThis retrospective study included 147 patients with newly diagnosed IBC (77 with locally advanced and 70 with metastatic IBC) treated with neoadjuvant therapy or first-line chemotherapy during the period from January 2004 through December 2012 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. CTCs were detected and enumerated using the CellSearch system before patients were started with chemotherapy.ResultsThe proportion of patients with ¿1 CTC was lower among patients with stage III than among patients with metastatic IBC (54.5% versus 84.3%; P¿=¿0.0002); the proportion of patients with ¿5 CTCs was also lower for stage III than for metastatic IBC (19.5% versus 47.1%; P¿=¿0.0004). Patients with <5 CTCs had significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR]¿=¿0.60; P¿=¿0.02) and overall survival (HR¿=¿0.59; P¿=¿0.03) than patients with ¿5 CTCs. Among patients with stage III IBC, there was non-significant difference in PFS (HR¿=¿0.66; 95% confidence ratio (CI), 0.31 to 1.39; P¿=¿0.29) and OS (HR¿=¿0.54; 95% CI, 0.24 to 1.26; P¿=¿0.48) in patients with no CTCs compared to patients with ¿1 CTCs. In multivariate analysis, CTC was prognostic for PFS and OS independently from clinical stage.ConclusionsCTCs can be detected in a large proportion of patients with newly diagnosed IBC and are a strong predictor of worse prognosis in patients with newly diagnosed IBC. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 | 11 | 69% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 69% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 54 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 39% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#2,858,470
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#295
of 2,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,326
of 358,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#8
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 358,673 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.