↓ Skip to main content

RAS testing in metastatic colorectal cancer: advances in Europe

Overview of attention for article published in Virchows Archiv, November 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
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
Title
RAS testing in metastatic colorectal cancer: advances in Europe
Published in
Virchows Archiv, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00428-015-1876-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

J Han JM Van Krieken, Etienne Rouleau, Marjolijn J. L. Ligtenberg, Nicola Normanno, Scott D. Patterson, Andreas Jung

Abstract

Personalized medicine shows promise for maximizing efficacy and minimizing toxicity of anti-cancer treatment. KRAS exon 2 mutations are predictive of resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor-directed monoclonal antibodies in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Recent studies have shown that broader RAS testing (KRAS and NRAS) is needed to select patients for treatment. While Sanger sequencing is still used, approaches based on various methodologies are available. Few CE-approved kits, however, detect the full spectrum of RAS mutations. More recently, "next-generation" sequencing has been developed for research use, including parallel semiconductor sequencing and reversible termination. These techniques have high technical sensitivities for detecting mutations, although the ideal threshold is currently unknown. Finally, liquid biopsy has the potential to become an additional tool to assess tumor-derived DNA. For accurate and timely RAS testing, appropriate sampling and prompt delivery of material is critical. Processes to ensure efficient turnaround from sample request to RAS evaluation must be implemented so that patients receive the most appropriate treatment. Given the variety of methodologies, external quality assurance programs are important to ensure a high standard of RAS testing. Here, we review technical and practical aspects of RAS testing for pathologists working with metastatic colorectal cancer tumor samples. The extension of markers from KRAS to RAS testing is the new paradigm for biomarker testing in colorectal cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 1%
Unknown 71 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 16 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Student > Master 9 13%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 13 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 10%
Computer Science 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 13 18%
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 17 November 2015.
All research outputs
#15,350,522
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from Virchows Archiv
#1,272
of 1,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,555
of 252,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virchows Archiv
#16
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 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 1,948 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 252,470 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 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.