↓ Skip to main content

Clinical correlation of molecular (VEGF, FGF, PDGF, c-Myc, c-Kit, Ras, p53) expression in juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma

Overview of attention for article published in European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Clinical correlation of molecular (VEGF, FGF, PDGF, c-Myc, c-Kit, Ras, p53) expression in juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00405-018-5110-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anupam Mishra, Subhash Chandra Mishra, Ashoak Mani Tripathi, Amita Pandey

Abstract

A molecular surrogate may exist for the clinical behaviour of juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma (JNA). In 9-14 cases, a 'correlation' of clinical behaviour with molecular expression (m-RNA expression through RT-PCR) of VEGF, FGF, PDGF, Ras, c-Myc, c-Kit and p53 was undertaken. A comparison of the two extremes of expressions characterized some specific clinical phenotypes for every marker except c-Myc. A higher FGF was associated with post-adolescent presentation, smaller tumour size, enhanced haemorrhage and recurrence. A higher c-Kit was associated with adolescents, rapid growth, skull base involvement and recurrence. Enhanced Ras was associated with post-adolescence, smaller tumour size, skull base involvement and recurrence. Enhanced p53 and PDGF were associated with adolescents, early presentation and rapid progression. Higher VEGF expression was associated with skull base involvement and enhanced haemorrhage. This study is currently the only evidence revealing a clinical molecular association in JNA and larger multicentric studies need to be performed to show a statistical significance.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 29%
Student > Master 2 14%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 14%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Unknown 5 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 September 2020.
All research outputs
#7,575,658
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#470
of 3,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,876
of 335,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
#4
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 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 3,127 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 335,278 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.