| Title |
Clinical impact of molecular classifications in gastric cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Updates in Surgery, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13304-018-0546-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniele Marrelli, Karol Polom, Alessandro Neri, Franco Roviello |
| Abstract |
Treatment options to gastric cancer (GC) have been changing in recent years from a standard to a tailored approach. Different individualized procedures can range from endoscopic resection, D2 with open or minimally invasive approach, to neo-adjuvant therapy followed by extended surgery. In more advanced stages, a combined approach with the inclusion of intraperitoneal chemo-hyperthermia (HIPEC) may represent a new advanced option. The inclusion of histological type according to Laurén classification in the flowchart of treatment could increase both accuracy and effectiveness of such tailored approach. New molecular classifications of GC have been introduced recently and translational clinical studies are ongoing. These classifications are expected to be included in multidisciplinary treatment of GC. In particular, in the group with microsatellite instability a less extended lymphadenectomy may be proposed. Also tailored neo-adjuvant treatment may be proposed according to molecular classifications. The group of patients with epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition shows very high propensity to peritoneal dissemination, as well as N-metastases, and may benefit from prophylactic HIPEC and extended lymphadenectomy when confirmed in prospective trials. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Germany | 1 | 20% |
| Poland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 29% |
| Unknown | 7 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Design | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 June 2018.
All research outputs
#12,780,870
of 23,083,773 outputs
Outputs from Updates in Surgery
#242
of 642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,813
of 330,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Updates in Surgery
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,083,773 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 642 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 330,262 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.