| Title |
Low 25-OH vitamin D levels at time of diagnosis and recurrence of ovarian cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-4055-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Teresa Granato, Lucia Manganaro, Luca Petri, Maria Grazia Porpora, Valentina Viggiani, Antonio Angeloni, Emanuela Anastasi |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study was to evaluate the correlation between 25-OH vitamin D and ovarian cancer as a diagnostic marker or recurrence disease marker. We studied the following: (1) 61 women without gynecologic diseases, (2) 45 women affected by benign ovarian disease, (3) 46 women with recent diagnosis of ovarian cancer, (4) 26 follow-up women with recurrent ovarian cancer, and (5) 32 follow-up women with stable ovarian cancer. The 25-OH vitamin D was quantified with LUMIPULSE® G 25-OH vitamin D on LUMIPULSE® G 1200 (Fujirebio, Japan). As a threshold value, identified by ROC curve analysis, 20.2 ng/mL (sensitivity 73.3 %, specificity 84 %) was chosen corresponding to the limit between sufficient and insufficient 25-OH vitamin D according to the WHO. Low 25-OH vitamin D levels were observed in 26 % of women without gynecologic diseases, in 80 % of women with recent diagnosis of ovarian cancer and in 24 % women affected by benign ovarian diseases (p < 0.001). The follow-up study showed an insufficient level of 25-OH vitamin D in 73 % women with recurrent ovarian cancer and in 47 % women with stable ovarian cancer (p < 0.0003). This study showed that patients with ovarian cancer are often insufficient in 25-OH vitamin D compared to women with benign ovarian diseases. The women with recurrent ovarian cancer presented more often low levels compared to women with stable ovarian cancer. This study suggests that 25-OH vitamin D, due to its antiproliferative properties, can be a good marker for ovarian cancer also. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 19% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 44% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
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 14 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,320,000
of 22,862,742 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,835
of 2,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,578
of 267,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#153
of 232 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,862,742 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,623 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 267,272 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 232 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.