| Title |
Next-generation sequencing: hype and hope for development of personalized radiation therapy?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Oncology, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13014-015-0481-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ingeborg Tinhofer, Franziska Niehr, Robert Konschak, Sandra Liebs, Matthias Munz, Albrecht Stenzinger, Wilko Weichert, Ulrich Keilholz, Volker Budach |
| Abstract |
The introduction of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in the field of cancer research has boosted worldwide efforts of genome-wide personalized oncology aiming at identifying predictive biomarkers and novel actionable targets. Despite considerable progress in understanding the molecular biology of distinct cancer entities by the use of this revolutionary technology and despite contemporaneous innovations in drug development, translation of NGS findings into improved concepts for cancer treatment remains a challenge. The aim of this article is to describe shortly the NGS platforms for DNA sequencing and in more detail key achievements and unresolved hurdles. A special focus will be given on potential clinical applications of this innovative technique in the field of radiation oncology. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 61 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 20% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 16% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 4 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 17% |
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 05 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,466,608
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#421
of 2,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,517
of 268,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#10
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 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 2,057 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 268,158 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.