↓ Skip to main content

Following the Preclinical Data: Leveraging the Abscopal Effect More Efficaciously

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Following the Preclinical Data: Leveraging the Abscopal Effect More Efficaciously
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2017.00066
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wilfred Ngwa, Zi Ouyang

Abstract

Radiotherapy is employed in the treatment of over 50% of cancer patients. However, this therapy approach is limited to mainly treating localized disease. In 1953, Mole described the remarkable abscopal effect, whereby, localized radiotherapy of a patient's primary tumor might engender regression of cancer at distant sites, which were not irradiated. Current consensus is that if the abscopal effect can be efficaciously leveraged, it would transform the field of radiation oncology, extending the use of radiotherapy to treatment of both localized and metastatic disease. A close examination of the literature on the abscopal effect proffers a disruptive new hypothesis for consideration in future clinical trials. This hypothesis is that generating a subcutaneous human tumor autograft as the primary tumor may be a more efficacious approach to prime the abscopal effect. Following the preclinical data, the merits and demerits of such an approach are examined in this article.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 18%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 12%
Physics and Astronomy 4 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 29%
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 07 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,318
of 22,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,779
of 324,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#63
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,428 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. 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 324,698 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.