↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Malignant Ewing-Like Neoplasm With an EWSR1-KLF15 Fusion: At the Crossroads of a Myoepithelial Carcinoma and a Ewing-Like Sarcoma. A Case Report With Treatment Options
Published in
International Journal of Surgical Pathology, February 2018
DOI 10.1177/1066896918755009
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We present a case of a malignant Ewing-like neoplasm of the parotid gland in a 20-year-old woman with an EWSR1-KLF15 gene fusion that presented with pulmonary metastasis. Despite the fact that the tumor was essentially immunohistochemically negative for keratins, p63, and p40, we interpret this neoplasm as an unusual form of a high-grade myoepithelial carcinoma based on its focal plasmacytoid cytology, chondromyxoid matrix, SOX10, S100 protein, and calponin expression, and the knowledge that the EWSR1-KLF15 gene fusion has, to date, only been identified in 2 tumors, both myoepithelial carcinomas of the kidney. We also present a cytogenetic analysis of this unusual tumor. This "Ewing-like myoepithelial carcinoma" initially did not respond to 2 cycles of ifosfamide and etoposide alternated with a cycle of cytoxan, adriamycin, and vincristine, a standard regimen for Ewing sarcoma. Subsequent oral pazopanib therapy did result in a reduction of the patient's pulmonary and nodal disease.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 19 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 %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 21%
Professor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Unknown 6 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 December 2018.
All research outputs
#14,272,319
of 23,316,003 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Surgical Pathology
#271
of 885 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,115
of 441,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Surgical Pathology
#11
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,316,003 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 885 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 441,694 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 67% of its contemporaries.