↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
A Phase I/II Study Targeting Angiogenesis Using Bevacizumab Combined with Chemotherapy and a Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor (Valproic Acid) in Advanced Sarcomas
Published in
Cancers, February 2018
DOI 10.3390/cancers10020053
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Epigenetic events and genetic alterations under the control of the tumor microenvironment potentially mediate tumor induced angiogenesis involved in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) metastasis. Addition of antiangiogenic agent, such as bevacizumab, to standard chemotherapy in treatment of sarcoma has been studied in clinical trials, but most of the findings have not supported its use. We hypothesized the existence of an epigenetically mediated "angiogenic switch", and the tumor microenvironment, prevents bevacizumab from truly blocking angiogenesis. The addition of valproic acid (VPA), a weak histone deacetylase inhibitor, and bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor, together with the cytotoxic effects of gemcitabine and docetaxel, may enhance responses and alter chemoresistance. This was designed as a phase I/II trial with primary endpoints including safety of the treatment combination and tumor response. Unresectable or metastatic sarcoma patients >18 years of age, irrespective of number of prior treatments, received VPA 40 mg/kg orally for 5 days prior to day 1, bevacizumab at 15 mg/kg IV on day 1, gemcitabine 900 mg/m² (day 1, day 8), and docetaxel 75 mg/m² (day 8). Cycles were of 28 day duration. Bevacizumab and VPA were continued as maintenance after 6 cycles, until disease progression. A standard 3 + 3 phase I dose de-escalation design was utilized to evaluate safety. Gain of function p53 gene mutation testing was performed on available archival tissue specimens. A total of 46 patients (30 female, 16 male) with median age of 60 (range 24-81) years were enrolled; 34 (73.9%) patients received prior chemotherapy, 14 (30%) of which received prior gemcitabine and docetaxel. Patients received a median of 5.5 cycles (range 0-24 of treatment (min 0, one patient died prior to completing the first cycle; max: 24, one patient received 6 cycles and 18 maintenance cycles before progressing). Seventeen patients underwent dose reduction, of which VPA was reduced in 6 patients. Forty-one patients were evaluable for response. There was a confirmed complete response in 1 (epithelioid sarcoma), and a partial response (PR) in 6 (1 carcinosarcoma, 2 extrauterine leiomyosarcoma (LMS), 2 undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, and 1 uterine LMS) patients. Stable disease (SD) was seen in 21 patients for at least 2 months. One subject with prior gemcitabine and docetaxel had PR, and 7 had SD. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.7 months (95% CI: 2.1-8.0), and overall survival (OS) was 12.9 months (95% CI: 8.3-14.5). Three patients died due to tumor progression while on the study. The combination of VPA, bevacizumab, gemcitabine, and docetaxel appears to be moderately safe and well tolerated. Given that there are very limited options for patients with relapsed refractory STS, this drug combination may be an important therapy to consider. This combination treatment deserves further investigation in epithelioid and carcinosarcoma subtypes.

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 5 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 39 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 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 13%
Other 3 8%
Professor 3 8%
Researcher 2 5%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 21 54%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 21 54%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 30 November 2023.
All research outputs
#4,520,385
of 27,289,371 outputs
Outputs from Cancers
#1,989
of 16,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,291
of 348,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancers
#19
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,289,371 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,950 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 348,441 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.