↓ Skip to main content

Markers in the epidermal growth factor receptor pathway and skin toxicity during erlotinib treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Oncology, September 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

patent
3 patents

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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.
Article details
Title
Markers in the epidermal growth factor receptor pathway and skin toxicity during erlotinib treatment
Published in
Annals of Oncology, September 2007
DOI 10.1093/annonc/mdm444
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Skin toxicity is a common adverse effect of erlotinib and other anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents. The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between markers in the EGFR pathway and skin rash. Eighteen patients with metastatic breast cancer were treated with daily oral erlotinib at 150 mg. Skin biopsies were obtained at baseline and after 1 month of treatment in 15 patients. EGFR, phosphorylated EGFR (pEGFR), phosphorylated mitogen-activated protein kinase (pMAPK), and phosphorylated Akt (pAkt) or Ki67 were examined quantitatively by immunohistochemistry. 11 of 18 (61%, 95% confidence interval 35.7% to 82.7%) patients developed skin rash. pAkt at baseline was significantly higher in patients with no rash than those with a grade 1 or 2 rash (18.8 +/- 8.3 versus 2.4 +/- 1.2 versus 3.3 +/- 3.3; P = 0.0017 for trend). There was a trend towards a significant increase of pMAPK in skin posttreatment with increasing grade of rash (no rash versus grade 1 versus grade 2 rash: 4.5 +/- 2.3 versus 8.4 +/- 4.2 versus 19.4 +/- 4.6; P = 0.036). Other markers were not associated with rash. pAkt was significantly associated with not developing a rash and may have a predictive utility for skin toxicity in patients treated with erlotinib and possibly with other anti-EGFR agents.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

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.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Netherlands 1 3%
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 27 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 20%
Student > Master 4 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Professor 3 10%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 13%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Unknown 4 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 October 2017.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Oncology
#4,156
of 7,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,285
of 83,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Oncology
#30
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 83,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.