| Title |
Systemic Treatment for Adults with Synovial Sarcoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Treatment Options in Oncology, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11864-018-0525-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ingrid M. E. Desar, Emmy D. G. Fleuren, Winette T. A. van der Graaf |
| Abstract |
Synovial sarcoma (SS) is a rare, yet highly malignant, type of soft tissue sarcoma (STS), for which survival has not improved significantly during the past years. In this review, we focus on systemic treatment in adults. Compared to other STS, SS are relatively chemosensitive. Ifosfamide and ifosfamide combinations are active in different lines of treatment. In high-risk extremity and chest wall STS, neoadjuvant doxorubicin and ifosfamide has shown as much activity as high-dose ifosfamide. There are indications that combination chemotherapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide in this setting improves outcome. In the first-line metastatic setting, combination treatment with doxorubicin and ifosfamide is a preferred option in fit patients, while in other patients, sequential doxorubicin and ifosfamide can be considered. In second and later lines, pazopanib and trabectedin have shown activity. Many new approaches to treat metastatic SS are currently under investigation, both preclinical as well as clinical, including other receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, epigenetic modulators, compounds interfering with DNA damage response (DDR), and immunotherapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 86 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 12% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Researcher | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 29 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 37% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 32 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,210,596
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from Current Treatment Options in Oncology
#169
of 674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,803
of 332,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Treatment Options in Oncology
#7
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 674 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. 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 332,619 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 61% of its contemporaries.