| Title |
Selecting postoperative adjuvant systemic therapy for early stage breast cancer: A critical assessment of commercially available gene expression assays
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Seminars in Surgical Oncology, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1002/jso.24561 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David M. Hyams, Eric Schuur, Javier Angel Aristizabal, Juan Enrique Bargallo Rocha, Cesar Cabello, Roberto Elizalde, Laura García‐Estévez, Henry L. Gomez, Artur Katz, Aníbal Nuñez De Pierro |
| Abstract |
Risk stratification of patients with early stage breast cancer may support adjuvant chemotherapy decision-making. This review details the development and validation of six multi-gene classifiers, each of which claims to provide useful prognostic and possibly predictive information for early stage breast cancer patients. A careful assessment is presented of each test's analytical validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility, as well as the quality of evidence supporting its use. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Guatemala | 1 | 20% |
| Mexico | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 36% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 18 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 27 June 2018.
All research outputs
#5,391,140
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Seminars in Surgical Oncology
#281
of 2,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,947
of 322,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Seminars in Surgical Oncology
#5
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,799 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 322,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.