↓ Skip to main content

Prediction of resistance to chemotherapy in ovarian cancer: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Prediction of resistance to chemotherapy in ovarian cancer: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Cancer, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1101-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine L Lloyd, Ian A Cree, Richard S Savage

Abstract

Patient response to chemotherapy for ovarian cancer is extremely heterogeneous and there are currently no tools to aid the prediction of sensitivity or resistance to chemotherapy and allow treatment stratification. Such a tool could greatly improve patient survival by identifying the most appropriate treatment on a patient-specific basis. PubMed was searched for studies predicting response or resistance to chemotherapy using gene expression measurements of human tissue in ovarian cancer. 42 studies were identified and both the data collection and modelling methods were compared. The majority of studies utilised fresh-frozen or formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. Modelling techniques varied, the most popular being Cox proportional hazards regression and hierarchical clustering which were used by 17 and 11 studies respectively. The gene signatures identified by the various studies were not consistent, with very few genes being identified by more than two studies. Patient cohorts were often noted to be heterogeneous with respect to chemotherapy treatment undergone by patients. A clinically applicable gene signature capable of predicting patient response to chemotherapy has not yet been identified. Research into a predictive, as opposed to prognostic, model could be highly beneficial and aid the identification of the most suitable treatment for patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 126 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 23%
Researcher 20 15%
Student > Master 16 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 25 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 17%
Chemistry 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 37 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 March 2015.
All research outputs
#13,937,513
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#3,191
of 8,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#131,415
of 259,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#75
of 190 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,295 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 259,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 190 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.