↓ Skip to main content

Tumor Regression Grading of Gastrointestinal Carcinomas after Neoadjuvant Treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
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 (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
114 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 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
Tumor Regression Grading of Gastrointestinal Carcinomas after Neoadjuvant Treatment
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2013.00262
Pubmed ID
Authors

Svenja Thies, Rupert Langer

Abstract

Multimodal therapy concepts have been successfully implemented in the treatment of locally advanced gastrointestinal malignancies. The effects of neoadjuvant chemo- or radiochemotherapy such as scarry fibrosis or resorptive changes and inflammation can be determined by histopathological investigation of the subsequent resection specimen. Tumor regression grading (TRG) systems which aim to categorize the amount of regressive changes after cytotoxic treatment mostly refer onto the amount of therapy induced fibrosis in relation to residual tumor or the estimated percentage of residual tumor in relation to the previous tumor site. Commonly used TRGs for upper gastrointestinal carcinomas are the Mandard grading and the Becker grading system, e.g., and for rectal cancer the Dworak or the Rödel grading system, or other systems which follow similar definitions. Namely for gastro-esophageal carcinomas these TRGs provide important prognostic information since complete or subtotal tumor regression has shown to be associated with better patient's outcome. The prognostic value of TRG may even exceed those of currently used staging systems (e.g., TNM staging) for tumors treated by neoadjuvant therapy. There have been some limitations described regarding interobserver variability especially in borderline cases, which may be improved by standardization of work up of resection specimen and better training of histopathologic determination of regressive changes. It is highly recommended that TRG should be implemented in every histopathological report of neoadjuvant treated gastrointestinal carcinomas. The aim of this review is to disclose the relevance of histomorphological TRG to accomplish an optimal therapy for patients with gastrointestinal carcinomas.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 160 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 15%
Researcher 22 13%
Student > Master 20 12%
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 9%
Other 40 25%
Unknown 24 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 103 63%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Computer Science 3 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 33 20%
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 31 January 2014.
All research outputs
#17,684,462
of 25,994,718 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#8,062
of 22,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,523
of 292,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#127
of 327 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,994,718 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,866 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 292,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 327 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 59% of its contemporaries.