↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Lymph node identification following neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer: A stage‐stratified analysis using the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER)‐medicare database
Published in
Journal of Surgical Oncology, August 2015
DOI 10.1002/jso.23991
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) for rectal adenocarcinoma reduces lymph node (LN) identification following surgical resection. We sought to evaluate the relationship between LN identification following nCRT and disease-specific survival (DSS), stratified by pathologic stage. The SEER-Medicare database (2000-2009) was queried for 1,216 pathologic stage I-III rectal cancer patients who underwent nCRT followed by curative-intent resection. Cox regressions evaluated the association between pathologic stage and DSS for LN cut-points from ≥2 up to ≥12 LNs. Extent of LN identification did not influence DSS in ypStage I or ypStage III disease; in particular, the 12 LN cut-point was not associated with DSS for ypStage I (HR 1.29, P = 0.51) or ypStage III (HR 1.08, P = 0.42) patients. In ypStage II patients, actuarial survival improved continually with increasing lymph node identification up to ≥12 LNs. The 5 LN cut-point was associated with the greatest reduction of risk of cancer death (HR 0.56, P = 0.006), with decreasing magnitudes of survival benefit associated with nodal counts beyond 5 LN. The 12 LN cut-point was not associated with DSS in ypStage II patients (HR 0.67, P = 0.07). The association between DSS and LN identification is a dynamic outcome that varies by pathologic stage, with unique prognostic significance for ypStage II patients. 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 profile of 1 X user 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 13 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 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 23%
Researcher 2 15%
Other 1 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 38%
Psychology 1 8%
Engineering 1 8%
Unknown 6 46%
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 06 August 2015.
All research outputs
#24,528,936
of 27,265,018 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Surgical Oncology
#747
of 925 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,455
of 277,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Surgical Oncology
#27
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,265,018 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 925 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 277,497 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.