| Title |
Consenso de la Sociedad Española de Anatomía Patológica y la Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica sobre biomarcadores en cáncer de mama
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista Española de Patología, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.patol.2017.12.002 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
José Palacios Calvo, Joan Albanell, Federico Rojo, Eva Ciruelos, Ignacio Aranda-López, Javier Cortés, Tomás García-Caballero, Miguel Martín, María Ángeles López-García, Ramon Colomer |
| Abstract |
This consensus statement is a joint initiative of the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM). It revises and updates the recommendations for the use of biomarkers in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. The group of experts recommends that, in all cases of breast cancer, the histologic grade and the alpha-estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor, Ki-67 and HER2 status should be determined, in order to assist prognosis and establish therapeutic options, including hormone therapy, chemotherapy and anti-HER2 therapy. One of the four available genetic prognostic platforms (MammaPrint®, Oncotype DX®, Prosigna®or EndoPredict®) may be used in node-negative ER-positive patients to establish a prognostic category and decide, together with the patient, whether adjuvant treatment be limited to hormonal therapy. Newer technologies, including next generation sequencing, liquid biopsy, tumour infiltrating lymphocytes or PD-1 determination, are still investigational. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 8 | 57% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 79% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 21% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 20 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 41% |
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 26 September 2018.
All research outputs
#4,096,988
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Española de Patología
#19
of 162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,545
of 351,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Española de Patología
#1
of 5 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 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 162 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. 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 351,830 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 5 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