| Title |
Lymphoma in autopsy cases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12024-018-9996-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ahmad Alkhasawneh, Aysha Mubeen, Arun Gopinath |
| Abstract |
Lymphoproliferative disorders cause significant morbidity and mortality, either related to the disease itself or therapy complications. Some cases of lymphoma may have vague clinical presentation, especially in the absence of lymphadenopathy, and a clinical work up may not be conclusive. Our study focuses on autopsy cases of lymphoma patients, emphasizing clinically unsuspected cases. Autopsy records from the last 20 years at our institution were searched, and the clinical parameters were recorded. Fifteen cases of lymphoma were identified, and 5 cases were diagnosed at the time of autopsy. Most B-cell lymphoma cases were mainly nodal disease, while T-cell lymphoma cases had widespread extra-nodal disease. Most deaths in B-cell lymphoma are due to infection/therapy induced immunosuppression, whereas T-cell lymphoma deaths are due to organ infiltration by lymphoma. Postmortem examination may reveal clinically unsuspected lymphoma, especially in rapidly deteriorating patients with vague presentation such as skin rash, bowel obstruction/bleeding or pacemaker malfunction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 10% |
| Researcher | 1 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 30% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 June 2018.
All research outputs
#16,454,538
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#407
of 1,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,384
of 332,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#10
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 332,603 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.