↓ Skip to main content

Invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin as a distinct variant of lobular carcinoma: a case report

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic Pathology, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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.
Title
Invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin as a distinct variant of lobular carcinoma: a case report
Published in
Diagnostic Pathology, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1746-1596-7-91
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hacer Haltas, Reyhan Bayrak, Sibel Yenidunya, Dilek Kosehan, Meral Sen, Kayihan Akin

Abstract

The differences between invasive lobular and ductal carcinomas affect the diagnostic and therapeutic management for patients with breast cancer. In most cases, this can be accomplished because of distinct histomorphologic features. However, occasionally, this task may become quite difficult, in particular when dealing with the variants of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Lobular carcinoma has been considered a variant of mucin-secreting carcinoma with only intracytoplasmic mucin. The presence of extracellular mucin is a feature of ductal carcinoma. Herein is presented a case of lobular carcinoma with extracellular and intracellular mucin in a 43-year-old female patient, and confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Up to the present, infiltrating lobular carcinoma displaying extracellular mucin has not been described in the literature except two case. Virtual slides: The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1839906067716744.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 29%
Student > Postgraduate 2 29%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 14%
Professor 1 14%
Other 1 14%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 71%
Physics and Astronomy 1 14%
Computer Science 1 14%

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 08 January 2014.
All research outputs
#3,063,793
of 4,507,509 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#332
of 549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,487
of 122,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#16
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 549 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 122,891 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.