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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Current Status of CTCs as Liquid Biopsy in Lung Cancer and Future Directions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2015.00209 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhuo Zhang, Nithya Ramnath, Sunitha Nagrath |
| Abstract |
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have garnered a lot of attention in the past few decades. Isolation of these rare cells from the billions of blood cells has been a challenge until recent times. With the advent of new sensitive technologies that permit live cell isolation and downstream genomic analysis, the existing paradigm of CTC research has evolved to explore clinical utility of these cells. CTCs have been identified as prognostic and pharmacodynamic biomarkers in many solid tumors, including lung cancer. As a means of liquid biopsy, CTCs could play a major role in the development of personalized medicine and targeted therapies. This review discusses the state of various isolation strategies, cell separation techniques and key studies that illustrate the application of liquid biopsy to lung cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 94 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 17% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 15% |
| Unknown | 18 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 12% |
| Engineering | 7 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 05 November 2016.
All research outputs
#3,274,815
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#922
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,605
of 286,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#4
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 286,342 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.