| Title |
Personalized cancer medicine and the future of pathology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Virchows Archiv, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00428-011-1179-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
H. Moch, P. R. Blank, M. Dietel, G. Elmberger, K. M. Kerr, J. Palacios, F. Penault-Llorca, G. Rossi, T. D. Szucs |
| Abstract |
In February 2011, a group of pathologists from different departments in Europe met in Zurich, Switzerland, to discuss opportunities and challenges for pathology in the era of personalized medicine. The major topics of the meeting were assessment of the role of pathology in personalized medicine, its future profile among other biomedical disciplines with an interest in personalized medicine as well as the evolution of companion diagnostics. The relevance of novel technologies for genome analysis in clinical practice was discussed. The participants recognize that there should be more initiatives taken by the pathology community in companion diagnostics and in the emerging field of next-generation sequencing and whole genome analysis. The common view of the participants was that the pathology community has to be mobilized for stronger engagement in the future of personalized medicine. Pathologists should be aware of the challenges and the analytical opportunities of the new technologies. Challenges of clinical trial design as well as insurance and reimbursement questions were addressed. The pathology community has the responsibility to lead medical colleagues into embracing this new area of genomic medicine. Without this effort, the discipline of pathology risks losing its key position in molecular tissue diagnostics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 17 | 20% |
| Unknown | 10 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 7% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 12 | 14% |
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 26 December 2011.
All research outputs
#18,301,870
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from Virchows Archiv
#1,527
of 1,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,727
of 240,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virchows Archiv
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,934 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 240,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.