↓ Skip to main content

Prospective evaluation of Ki-67 system in histological grading of soft tissue sarcomas in the Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG0304

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, April 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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Prospective evaluation of Ki-67 system in histological grading of soft tissue sarcomas in the Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG0304
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12957-016-0869-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kazuhiro Tanaka, Tadashi Hasegawa, Takayuki Nojima, Yoshinao Oda, Junki Mizusawa, Haruhiko Fukuda, Yukihide Iwamoto

Abstract

The correct clinical staging of soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is critical for the selection of treatments. The staging system consists of histological grade of the tumors and French Federation of Cancer Center (FNCLCC) system based on mitotic count is widely used for the grading. In this study, we compared the validity and usefulness of Ki-67 grading system with FNCLCC system in JCOG0304 trial which investigated the efficacy and safety of perioperative chemotherapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide for STS. All 70 eligible patients with STS in the extremities treated by perioperative chemotherapy in JCOG0304 were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to investigate an influence on overall survival. The reproducibility of Ki-67 grading system in the histological grading of STS was higher than FNCLCC system (κ = 0.54 [95 % CI 0.39-0.71], and 0.46 [0.32-0.62], respectively). Although FNCLCC grade was not associated with overall survival (OS) in univariate analysis (HR 2.80 [0.74-10.55], p = 0.13), Ki-67 grading system had a tendency to associate with OS in univariate analysis (HR 4.12 [0.89-19.09], p = 0.07) and multivariate analysis with backward elimination (HR 3.51 [0.75-16.36], p = 0.11). This is the first report demonstrating the efficacy of Ki-67 grading system for the patients with STS in the prospective trial. The results indicate that Ki-67 grading system might be useful for the evaluation of histological grade of STS.

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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 9%
Lecturer 2 9%
Professor 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 6 26%
Unknown 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 57%
Computer Science 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 15 March 2022.
All research outputs
#3,214,331
of 23,342,232 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#75
of 2,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,700
of 300,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#2
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,083 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 300,299 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.