↓ Skip to main content

Zoledronic Acid as a New Adjuvant Therapeutic Strategy for Ewing's Sarcoma Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Research, September 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Zoledronic Acid as a New Adjuvant Therapeutic Strategy for Ewing's Sarcoma Patients
Published in
Cancer Research, September 2010
DOI 10.1158/0008-5472.can-09-4272
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guillaume A. Odri, Sophie Dumoucel, Gaëlle Picarda, Séverine Battaglia, François Lamoureux, Nadège Corradini, Julie Rousseau, Franck Tirode, Karine Laud, Olivier Delattre, François Gouin, Dominique Heymann, Françoise Redini

Abstract

Ewing's sarcoma (ES) is the second most frequent pediatric bone tumor also arising in soft tissues (15% of cases). The prognosis of patients with clinically detectable metastases at diagnosis, not responding to therapy or with disease relapse, is still very poor. Among new therapeutic approaches, bisphosphonates represent promising adjuvant molecules to chemotherapy to limit the osteolytic component of bone tumors and to protect from bone metastases. The combined effects of zoledronic acid and mafosfamide were investigated on cell proliferation, viability, apoptosis, and cell cycle distribution of human ES cell lines differing in their p53 and p16/ink4 status. ES models were developed to reproduce both soft tissue and intraosseous tumor development. Mice were treated with 100 μg/kg zoledronic acid (two or four times per week) and/or ifosfamide (30 mg/kg, one to three cycles of three injections). ES cell lines showed different sensitivities to zoledronic acid and mafosfamide at the cell proliferation level, with no correlation with their molecular status. Both drugs induced cell cycle arrest, but in the S or G(2)M phase, respectively. In vivo, zoledronic acid had no effect on soft tissue tumor progression, although it dramatically inhibited ES development in bone. When combined with ifosfamide, zoledronic acid exerted synergistic effects in the soft tissue model: Its combination with one cycle of ifosfamide resulted in an inhibitory effect similar to three cycles of ifosfamide alone. This very promising result could allow clinicians to diminish the doses of chemotherapy.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Japan 1 3%
Netherlands 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 34 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 21%
Other 6 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Professor 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 13%
Unspecified 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 February 2021.
All research outputs
#6,377,613
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Research
#6,733
of 17,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,786
of 98,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Research
#65
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,830 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 98,509 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.