↓ Skip to main content

Surgical Management of Advanced and Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Multidisciplinary Approach

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Surgical Management of Advanced and Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Multidisciplinary Approach
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2017.00107
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian M. Shinder, Kevin Rhee, Douglas Farrell, Nicholas J. Farber, Mark N. Stein, Thomas L. Jang, Eric A. Singer

Abstract

The past decade has seen a rapid proliferation in the number and types of systemic therapies available for renal cell carcinoma. However, surgery remains an integral component of the therapeutic armamentarium for advanced and metastatic kidney cancer. Cytoreductive surgery followed by adjuvant cytokine-based immunotherapy (predominantly high-dose interleukin 2) has largely given way to systemic-targeted therapies. Metastasectomy also has a role in carefully selected patients. Additionally, neoadjuvant systemic therapy may increase the feasibility of resecting the primary tumor, which may be beneficial for patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Several prospective trials examining the role of adjuvant therapy are underway. Lastly, the first immune checkpoint inhibitor was approved for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in 2015, providing a new treatment mechanism and new opportunities for combining systemic therapy with surgery. This review discusses current and historical literature regarding the surgical management of patients with advanced and mRCC and explores approaches for optimizing patient selection.

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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 12%
Student > Master 6 12%
Other 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 14 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 16 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. 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 18 October 2021.
All research outputs
#614,526
of 25,707,225 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#99
of 22,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,570
of 331,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#2
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,707,225 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,767 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 331,248 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 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 97% of its contemporaries.