↓ Skip to main content

Residual Tumor Volume as Best Outcome Predictor in Low Grade Glioma – A Nine-Years Near-Randomized Survey of Surgery vs. Biopsy

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
118 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Residual Tumor Volume as Best Outcome Predictor in Low Grade Glioma – A Nine-Years Near-Randomized Survey of Surgery vs. Biopsy
Published in
Scientific Reports, August 2016
DOI 10.1038/srep32286
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roland Roelz, David Strohmaier, Ramazan Jabbarli, Rainer Kraeutle, Karl Egger, Volker A. Coenen, Astrid Weyerbrock, Peter C. Reinacher

Abstract

Diffuse low grade gliomas (DLGG) are continuously progressive primary brain neoplasms that lead to neurological deficits and death. Treatment strategies are controversial. Randomized trials establishing the prognostic value of surgery do not exist. Here, we report the results of a nine-year near-randomized patient distribution between resection and biopsy. Until 2012, the Department of Neurosurgery and the Department of Stereotactic Neurosurgery at the University Medical Center Freiburg were organized as separate administrative units both coordinating DLGG patient treatment independently. All consecutive adult patients with a new diagnosis of DLGG by either stereotactic biopsy or resection were included. Pre- and post-operative tumor volumetry was performed. 126 patients, 87 men (69%), 39 women (31%), median age 41 years, were included. 77 (61%) were initially managed by biopsy, 49 (39%) by resection. A significant survival benefit was found for patients with an initial management by resection (5-year OS 82% vs. 54%). The survival benefit of patients with initial resection was reserved to patients with a residual tumor volume of less than 15 cm(3). Maximum safe resection is the first therapy of choice in DLGG patients if a near-complete tumor removal can be achieved. Accurate prediction of the extent-of-resection is required for selection of surgical candidates.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 11%
Researcher 11 10%
Other 9 8%
Other 24 22%
Unknown 29 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 42%
Neuroscience 16 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 38 35%
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 26 October 2017.
All research outputs
#15,481,888
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#78,450
of 124,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,795
of 337,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#2,306
of 3,688 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 124,252 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 337,486 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,688 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.