↓ Skip to main content

Randomized sham-controlled pilot trial of weekly electro-acupuncture for the prevention of taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy in women with early stage breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
181 Mendeley
Title
Randomized sham-controlled pilot trial of weekly electro-acupuncture for the prevention of taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy in women with early stage breast cancer
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10549-016-3759-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heather Greenlee, Katherine D. Crew, Jillian Capodice, Danielle Awad, Donna Buono, Zaixing Shi, Anne Jeffres, Sharon Wyse, Wendy Whitman, Meghna S. Trivedi, Kevin Kalinsky, Dawn L. Hershman

Abstract

To investigate the effect of electro-acupuncture (EA) as a non-pharmacological intervention to prevent or reduce chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy of taxane. Women with stage I-III breast cancer scheduled to receive taxane therapy were randomized to receive a standardized protocol of 12 true or sham EA (SEA) weekly treatments concurrent with taxane treatment. Subjects completed the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Taxane neurotoxicity subscale (FACT-NTX), and other assessments at baseline and weeks 6, 12, and 16. A total of 180 subjects were screened, 63 enrolled and 48 completed week 16 assessments. Mean age was 50 with 25 % white, 25 % black, and 43 % Hispanic; 52 % had no prior chemotherapy. At week 12, both groups reported an increase in mean BPI-SF worst pain score, but no mean differences were found between groups (SEA 2.8 vs. EA 2.6, P = .86). By week 16, the SEA group returned to baseline, while the EA group continued to worsen (SEA 1.7 vs. EA 3.4, P = .03). The increase in BPI-SF worst pain score was 1.62 points higher in the EA group than in the SEA group at week 16 (P = .04). In a randomized, sham-controlled trial of EA for prevention of taxane-induced CIPN, there were no differences in pain or neuropathy between groups at week 12. Of concern, subjects on EA had a slower recovery than SEA subjects. Future studies should focus on EA for treatment as opposed to prevention of CIPN.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 180 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 12%
Student > Master 21 12%
Other 16 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 6%
Researcher 10 6%
Other 41 23%
Unknown 60 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 40 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Psychology 5 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 60 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 24 January 2019.
All research outputs
#6,299,410
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#1,367
of 4,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,712
of 300,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#19
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,659 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 300,413 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.