↓ Skip to main content

EGFR Fusions as Novel Therapeutic Targets in Lung Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Discovery, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 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
EGFR Fusions as Novel Therapeutic Targets in Lung Cancer
Published in
Cancer Discovery, June 2016
DOI 10.1158/2159-8290.cd-16-0075
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kartik Konduri, Jean-Nicolas Gallant, Young Kwang Chae, Francis J. Giles, Barbara J. Gitlitz, Kyle Gowen, Eiki Ichihara, Taofeek K. Owonikoko, Vijay Peddareddigari, Suresh S. Ramalingam, Satyanarayan K. Reddy, Beth Eaby-Sandy, Tiziana Vavalà, Andrew Whiteley, Heidi Chen, Yingjun Yan, Jonathan H. Sheehan, Jens Meiler, Deborah Morosini, Jeffrey S. Ross, Philip J. Stephens, Vincent A. Miller, Siraj M. Ali, Christine M. Lovly

Abstract

Here, we report that novel epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene fusions comprising the N-terminal of EGFR linked to various fusion partners, most commonly RAD51, are recurrent in lung cancer. We describe five patients with metastatic lung cancer whose tumors harbored EGFR fusions, four of whom were treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with documented anti-tumor responses. In vitro, EGFR-RAD51 fusions are oncogenic and can be therapeutically targeted with available EGFR TKIs and therapeutic antibodies. These results support the dependence of EGFR-rearranged tumors on EGFR-mediated signaling and suggest several therapeutic strategies for patients whose tumors harbor this novel alteration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 4%
Unknown 98 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 18%
Other 11 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 23 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 16 November 2021.
All research outputs
#2,425,048
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Discovery
#948
of 3,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,244
of 339,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Discovery
#13
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,667 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 339,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.