↓ Skip to main content

Hypoxia in cancer: significance and impact on clinical outcome

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, April 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#28 of 893)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
patent
4 patents
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
q&a
2 Q&A threads

Citations

dimensions_citation
1856 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1023 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Hypoxia in cancer: significance and impact on clinical outcome
Published in
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, April 2007
DOI 10.1007/s10555-007-9055-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Vaupel, Arnulf Mayer

Abstract

Hypoxia, a characteristic feature of locally advanced solid tumors, has emerged as a pivotal factor of the tumor (patho-)physiome since it can promote tumor progression and resistance to therapy. Hypoxia represents a "Janus face" in tumor biology because (a) it is associated with restrained proliferation, differentiation, necrosis or apoptosis, and (b) it can also lead to the development of an aggressive phenotype. Independent of standard prognostic factors, such as tumor stage and nodal status, hypoxia has been suggested as an adverse prognostic factor for patient outcome. Studies of tumor hypoxia involving the direct assessment of the oxygenation status have suggested worse disease-free survival for patients with hypoxic cervical cancers or soft tissue sarcomas. In head & neck cancers the studies suggest that hypoxia is prognostic for survival and local control. Technical limitations of the direct O(2) sensing technique have prompted the use of surrogate markers for tumor hypoxia, such as hypoxia-related endogenous proteins (e.g., HIF-1alpha, GLUT-1, CA IX) or exogenous bioreductive drugs. In many - albeit not in all - studies endogenous markers showed prognostic significance for patient outcome. The prognostic relevance of exogenous markers, however, appears to be limited. Noninvasive assessment of hypoxia using imaging techniques can be achieved with PET or SPECT detection of radiolabeled tracers or with MRI techniques (e.g., BOLD). Clinical experience with these methods regarding patient prognosis is so far only limited. In the clinical studies performed up until now, the lack of standardized treatment protocols, inconsistencies of the endpoints characterizing the oxygenation status and methodological differences (e.g., different immunohistochemical staining procedures) may compromise the power of the prognostic parameter used.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 1,023 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 1%
United Kingdom 5 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
France 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
Belgium 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Ireland 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Other 8 <1%
Unknown 981 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 222 22%
Student > Master 159 16%
Researcher 149 15%
Student > Bachelor 100 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 62 6%
Other 128 13%
Unknown 203 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 178 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 177 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 170 17%
Chemistry 74 7%
Physics and Astronomy 48 5%
Other 143 14%
Unknown 233 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 20 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,742,516
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#28
of 893 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,719
of 91,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 893 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 91,327 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.