↓ Skip to main content

Novel approaches in the therapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Urology, April 2005
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
5 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
205 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
Novel approaches in the therapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma
Published in
World Journal of Urology, April 2005
DOI 10.1007/s00345-004-0466-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

John S. Lam, John T. Leppert, Arie S. Belldegrun, Robert A. Figlin

Abstract

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most lethal of the common urologic malignancies, with approximately 40% of patients eventually dying of cancer progression. Approximately one third of patients present with metastatic disease, and up to 40% treated for localized disease have a recurrence. Recent advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis, behavior, and molecular biology of RCC have paved the way for developments that may enhance early diagnosis, better predict tumor prognosis, and improve survival for RCC patients. The recent discovery of molecular tumor markers is expected to revolutionize the staging of RCC in the future and lead to the development of new therapies based on molecular targeting. Cytokine-based immunotherapy can be considered standard therapy in the treatment of metastatic RCC today. However, new therapies such as tumor vaccines, anti-angiogenesis agents, and small molecule inhibitors are being developed to improve efficacy and treat those patients who are unable to tolerate or are resistant to systemic immunotherapy. The aim of this review is to provide an update on current therapeutic approaches and targeted molecular therapy for metastatic RCC.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ukraine 1 2%
Unknown 51 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Researcher 9 17%
Professor 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 11 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 January 2022.
All research outputs
#3,907,044
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Urology
#337
of 2,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,929
of 76,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Urology
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,343 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. 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 76,083 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.