↓ Skip to main content

Urinary Markers in Bladder Cancer: An Update

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
Urinary Markers in Bladder Cancer: An Update
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, September 2018
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2018.00362
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giorgio Santoni, Maria B. Morelli, Consuelo Amantini, Nicola Battelli

Abstract

Bladder cancer (BC) is ones of the most common cancer worldwide. It is classified in muscle invasive (MIBC) and muscle non-invasive (NMIBC) BC. NMIBCs frequently recur and progress to MIBCs with a reduced survival rate and frequent distant metastasis. BC detection require unpleasant and expensive cystoscopy and biopsy, which are often accompanied by several adverse effects. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop novel diagnostic methods for initial detection and surveillance in both MIBCs and NMIBCs. Multiple urine-based tests approved by FDA for BC detection and surveillance are commercially available. However, at present, sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of these urine-based assays are still suboptimal and, in the attend to improve them, novel molecular markers as well as multiple-assays must to be translated in clinic. Now there are growing evidence toward the use of minimally invasive "liquid biopsy" to identify biomarkers in urologic malignancy. DNA- and RNA-based markers in body fluids such as blood and urine are promising potential markers in diagnostic, prognostic, predictive and monitoring urological malignancies. Thus, circulating cell-free DNA, DNA methylation and mutations, circulating tumor cells, miRNA, IncRNA and mRNAs, cell-free proteins and peptides, and exosomes have been assessed in urine specimens. However, proteomic and genomic data must to be validated in well-designed multicenter clinical studies, before to be employed in clinic oncology.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 126 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 17%
Researcher 15 12%
Other 13 10%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 36 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Chemistry 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 43 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 21 November 2019.
All research outputs
#6,574,797
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#2,167
of 22,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,831
of 346,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#34
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,432 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 346,007 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.