↓ Skip to main content

Identifying candidates with favorable prognosis following liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Data mining analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Surgical Oncology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Identifying candidates with favorable prognosis following liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Data mining analysis
Published in
Journal of Surgical Oncology, May 2015
DOI 10.1002/jso.23944
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The optimal cutoff of each value in configuring selection criteria for pre-transplant assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains uncertain. To build a predictive model for recurrent HCC, we performed data mining analysis on patients who underwent LT for HCC at University Health Network (n = 246). The model was externally validated using a cohort from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) database (n = 9,769). Among 246 patients, 14.6% (n = 36) experienced recurrent HCC within 2.5 years post-LT. The risk prediction model for recurrent HCC identified two subgroups with low-risk (total tumor diameter [TTD] <4 cm and serum alpha-fetoprotein [AFP] <73 ng/ml, n = 135) and with high-risk (TTD >4 cm and/or AFP >73 ng/ml, n = 111). The reproducibility of the model was validated through the SRTR database; overall patient survival rate was significantly better in low-risk group than high-risk group (P < 0.0001). Using Cox regression model, this yardstick, not Milan criteria, was revealed to efficiently predict post-transplant survival independent of underlying characteristics (P < 0.0001). Grouping LT candidates with pre-LT HCC by the cutoffs of TTD 4 cm and AFP 73 ng/ml which were unearthed by data mining analysis efficiently classify patients according by the post-transplant prognosis. J. Surg. Oncol. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 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 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 %
Indonesia 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 8 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Computer Science 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Unknown 11 37%
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 09 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,258,842
of 27,248,354 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Surgical Oncology
#125
of 139 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,203
of 281,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Surgical Oncology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,248,354 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 139 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 281,958 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them