↓ Skip to main content

Profiling lung adenocarcinoma by liquid biopsy: can one size fit all?

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Nanotechnology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 164)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Profiling lung adenocarcinoma by liquid biopsy: can one size fit all?
Published in
Cancer Nanotechnology, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12645-016-0023-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harry W. Clifford, Amy P. Cassidy, Courtney Vaughn, Evaline S. Tsai, Bianka Seres, Nirmesh Patel, Hannah L. O’Neill, Emil Hewage, John W. Cassidy

Abstract

Cancer is first and foremost a disease of the genome. Specific genetic signatures within a tumour are prognostic of disease outcome, reflect subclonal architecture and intratumour heterogeneity, inform treatment choices and predict the emergence of resistance to targeted therapies. Minimally invasive liquid biopsies can give temporal resolution to a tumour's genetic profile and allow the monitoring of treatment response through levels of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA). However, the detection of ctDNA in repeated liquid biopsies is currently limited by economic and time constraints associated with targeted sequencing. Here we bioinformatically profile the mutational and copy number spectrum of The Cancer Genome Network's lung adenocarcinoma dataset to uncover recurrently mutated genomic loci. We build a panel of 400 hotspot mutations and show that the coverage extends to more than 80% of the dataset at a median depth of 8 mutations per patient. Additionally, we uncover several novel single-nucleotide variants present in more than 5% of patients, often in genes not commonly associated with lung adenocarcinoma. With further optimisation, this hotspot panel could allow molecular diagnostics laboratories to build curated primer banks for 'off-the-shelf' monitoring of ctDNA by droplet-based digital PCR or similar techniques, in a time- and cost-effective manner.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 20%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 20%
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 17 February 2017.
All research outputs
#6,965,364
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Nanotechnology
#31
of 164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,548
of 415,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Nanotechnology
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 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 164 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 415,139 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 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.