↓ Skip to main content

An infant with hyperalertness, hyperkinesis, and failure to thrive: a rare diencephalic syndrome due to hypothalamic anaplastic astrocytoma

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
An infant with hyperalertness, hyperkinesis, and failure to thrive: a rare diencephalic syndrome due to hypothalamic anaplastic astrocytoma
Published in
BMC Cancer, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1626-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessia Stival, Maurizio Lucchesi, Silvia Farina, Anna Maria Buccoliero, Francesca Castiglione, Lorenzo Genitori, Maurizio de Martino, Iacopo Sardi

Abstract

Diencephalic Syndrome is a rare clinical condition of failure to thrive despite a normal caloric intake, hyperalertness, hyperkinesis, and euphoria usually associated with low-grade hypothalamic astrocytomas. We reported an unusual case of diencephalic cachexia due to hypothalamic anaplastic astrocytoma (WHO-grade III). Baseline endocrine function evaluation was performed in this patient before surgery. After histological diagnosis, he enrolled to a chemotherapy program with sequential high-dose chemotherapy followed by hematopoietic stem cell rescue. The last MRI evaluation showed a good response. The patient is still alive with good visual function 21 months after starting chemotherapy. Diencephalic cachexia can rarely be due to high-grade hypothalamic astrocytoma. We suggest that a nutritional support with chemotherapy given to high doses without radiotherapy could be an effective strategy for treatment of a poor-prognosis disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 23%
Student > Master 5 13%
Lecturer 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 11 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,345,593
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#4,111
of 8,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,539
of 267,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#80
of 173 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,303 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 267,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 173 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.