| Title |
Evidence-based best practices for EGFR T790M testing in lung cancer in Canada
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Oncology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3747/co.25.4044 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
T. Stockley, C.A. Souza, P.K. Cheema, B. Melosky, S. Kamel-Reid, M.S. Tsao, A. Spatz, A. Karsan |
| Abstract |
Epidermal growth factor receptor (egfr) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis) are recommended as first-line systemic therapy for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) having mutations in the EGFR gene. Resistance to tkis eventually occurs in all nsclc patients treated with such drugs. In patients with resistance to tkis caused by the EGFR T790M mutation, the third-generation tki osimertinib is now the standard of care. For optimal patient management, accurate EGFR T790M testing is required. A multidisciplinary working group of pathologists, laboratory medicine specialists, medical oncologists, a respirologist, and a thoracic radiologist from across Canada was convened to discuss best practices for EGFR T790M mutation testing in Canada. The group made recommendations in the areas of the testing algorithm and the pre-analytic, analytic, and post-analytic aspects of clinical testing for both tissue testing and liquid biopsy circulating tumour dna testing. The recommendations aim to improve EGFR T790M testing in Canada and to thereby improve patient care. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 13 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 30% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 15 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 14 December 2022.
All research outputs
#3,055,867
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Current Oncology
#175
of 2,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,127
of 343,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Oncology
#3
of 10 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 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 343,807 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.