↓ Skip to main content

Lessons from the Fourth Metronomic and Anti-angiogenic Therapy Meeting, 24–25 June 2014, Milan

Overview of attention for article published in Ecancermedicalscience, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
75 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.
Article details
Title
Lessons from the Fourth Metronomic and Anti-angiogenic Therapy Meeting, 24–25 June 2014, Milan
Published in
Ecancermedicalscience, September 2014
DOI 10.3332/ecancer.2014.463
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The Fourth Metronomic and Anti-angiogenic Therapy Meeting was held in Milan 24-25 June 2014. The meeting was a true translational meeting where researchers and clinicians shared their results, experiences, and insights in order to continue gathering useful evidence on metronomic approaches. Several speakers emphasised that exact mechanisms of action, best timing, and optimal dosage are still not well understood and that the field would learn a lot from ancillary studies performed during the clinical trials of metronomic chemotherapies. From the pre-clinical side, new research findings indicate additional possible mechanisms of actions of metronomic schedule on the immune and blood vessel compartments of the tumour micro-environment. New clinical results of metronomic chemotherapy were presented in particular in paediatric cancers [especially neuroblastoma and central nervous system (CNS) tumours], in angiosarcoma (together with beta-blockers), in hepatocellular carcinoma, in prostate cancer, and in breast cancer. The use of repurposed drugs such as metformin, celecoxib, or valproic acid in the metronomic regimen was reported and highlighted the potential of other candidate drugs to be repurposed. The clinical experiences from low- and middle-income countries with affordable regimens gave very encouraging results which will allow more patients to be effectively treated in economies where new drugs are not accessible. Looking at the impact of metronomic approaches that have been shown to be effective, it was admitted that those approaches were rarely used in clinical practice, in part because of the absence of commercial interest for companies. However, performing well-designed clinical trials of metronomic and repurposing approaches demonstrating substantial improvement, especially in populations with the greatest unmet needs, may be an easier solution than addressing the financial issue. Metronomics should always be seen as a chance to come up with new innovative affordable approaches and not as a cheap rescue strategy.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
India 1 1%
Unknown 74 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 20%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Other 6 8%
Professor 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 20 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 22 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2018.
All research outputs
#28,639,288
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Ecancermedicalscience
#1,202
of 1,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,169
of 281,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecancermedicalscience
#16
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,403 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 281,050 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.