↓ Skip to main content

The Impact of Neoadjuvant Treatment on Surgical Options and Outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
The Impact of Neoadjuvant Treatment on Surgical Options and Outcomes
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, June 2016
DOI 10.1245/s10434-016-5364-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Beyhan Ataseven, Gunter von Minckwitz

Abstract

Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) has become a well-established treatment method for patients with breast cancer, not only for those with large tumors, but also for patients with early high-risk cancers. In earlier times, the clinical advantage of NST was seen in improvement of tumor shrinkage for better operability, conversion of mastectomy candidates to breast conservation, and optimization of cosmetic results. Over the decades, therapy regimens were optimized, resulting in significantly higher response rates. Rates for breast conservation and for conversion from mastectomy to breast conservation, especially for patients with advanced breast cancers, rose significantly for patients undergoing NST. A multidisciplinary approach with close and accurate diagnostic assessment of the breast, axillary tumor, or both during NST and individual-response-guided surgery is mandatory. To reduce unnecessary surgery and prevent mastectomies, more conclusive prediction models and minimally invasive methods for selection of patients with pathologic complete remission after NST are needed. Furthermore, prospective studies demonstrate that sentinel node biopsy for patients with initial clinically node-positive axillary nodes converting to clinically node-negative axillary nodes is oncologically safe and offers less morbidity, avoiding complete axillary node dissection. Initial concerns regarding surgical complications and morbidity due to potential immune frailty of patients with NST were not observed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Professor 3 8%
Other 10 27%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 04 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,778,777
of 25,394,081 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#2,692
of 7,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,959
of 366,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#52
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,081 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 366,865 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 171 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 69% of its contemporaries.