| Title |
Molecular Classification and Management of Rare Pediatric Embryonal Brain Tumors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Oncology Reports, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11912-018-0717-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick Sin-Chan, Bryan K. Li, Ben Ho, Adriana Fonseca, Annie Huang |
| Abstract |
Malignant embryonal brain tumors (EBTs) of childhood span a wide clinical spectrum but can share remarkably similar morphologic features. This overlap presents significant diagnostic challenges, particularly for tumor entities that are rarely encountered in clinical practice and for which diagnostic criteria were poorly defined. This review will provide an update on the evolving characterization and treatment of rare EBTs. Rapid advances in genomic tools have led to the discovery of robust molecular markers, and identification of novel tumor types and subtypes for almost all major categories of pediatric brain tumors. These developments have had significant impact on improving the diagnostic classification of the rare EBTs, particularly for tumors with newly recognized C19MC alterations, central nervous system primitive neuroectodermal tumors (CNS-PNET), and pineoblastoma (PB). These important developments in the clinical and molecular understanding of rare EBTs are paving the way for novel therapeutic strategies and improved clinical management. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Portugal | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 09 July 2023.
All research outputs
#5,636,336
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Current Oncology Reports
#210
of 924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,658
of 327,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Oncology Reports
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 327,693 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 71% 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 done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.