↓ Skip to main content

Molecular Subtypes of KIT/PDGFRA Wild-Type Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A Report From the National Institutes of Health Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor Clinic

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Oncology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
27 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
305 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
Molecular Subtypes of KIT/PDGFRA Wild-Type Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A Report From the National Institutes of Health Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor Clinic
Published in
JAMA Oncology, July 2016
DOI 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.0256
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sosipatros A. Boikos, Alberto S. Pappo, J. Keith Killian, Michael P. LaQuaglia, Chris B. Weldon, Suzanne George, Jonathan C. Trent, Margaret von Mehren, Jennifer A. Wright, Josh D. Schiffman, Margarita Raygada, Karel Pacak, Paul S. Meltzer, Markku M. Miettinen, Constantine Stratakis, Katherine A. Janeway, Lee J. Helman

Abstract

Wild-type (WT) gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), which lack KIT and PDGFRA gene mutations, are the primary form of GIST in children and occasionally occur in adults. They respond poorly to standard targeted therapy. Better molecular and clinical characterization could improve management. To evaluate the clinical and tumor genomic features of WT GIST. Patients enrolled in an observational study at the National Institutes of Health starting in 2008 and were evaluated in a GIST clinic held once or twice yearly. Patients provided access to existing medical records and tumor specimens. Self-referred or physician-referred patients younger than 19 years with GIST or 19 years or older with known WT GIST (no mutations in KIT or PDGFRA) were recruited; 116 patients with WT GIST were enrolled, and 95 had adequate tumor specimen available. Tumors were characterized by immunohistochemical analysis (IHC) for succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) subunit B, sequencing of SDH genes, and determination of SDHC promoter methylation. Testing of germline SDH genes was offered to consenting patients and families. For classification, tumors were characterized by SDHA, B, C, or D (SDHX) mutations and other genetic and epigenetic alterations, including presence of mutations in germline. Clinical characteristics were categorized. Wild-type GIST specimens from 95 patients (median age, 23 [range, 7-78] years; 70% female) were classified into 3 molecular subtypes: SDH-competent (n = 11), defined by detection of SDHB by IHC; and 2 types of SDH-deficient GIST (n = 84). Of SDH-deficient tumors, 63 (67%) had SDH mutations, and in 31 of 38 (82%), the SDHX mutation was also present in germline. Twenty-one (22%) SDH-deficient tumors had methylation of the SDHC promoter leading to silencing of expression. Mutations in known cancer-associated pathways were identified in 9 of 11 SDH-competent tumors. Among patients with SDH-mutant tumors, 62% were female (39 of 63), median (range) age was 23 (7-58) years, and approximately 30% presented with metastases (liver [12 of 58], peritoneal [6 of 58], lymph node [15 of 23]). SDHC-epimutant tumors mostly affected young females (20 of 21; median [range] age, 15 [8-50] years), and approximately 40% presented with metastases (liver [7 of 19], peritoneal [1 of 19], lymph node [3 of 8]). SDH-deficient tumors occurred only in the stomach and had an indolent course. An observational study of WT GIST permitted the evaluation of a large number of patients with this rare disease. Three molecular subtypes with implications for prognosis and clinical management were identified.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Czechia 1 <1%
Unknown 122 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 15 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Master 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 29 24%
Unknown 36 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 40 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 11 August 2016.
All research outputs
#1,236,924
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Oncology
#1,694
of 3,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,992
of 367,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Oncology
#41
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 84.4. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 367,263 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.