↓ Skip to main content

Importance of Comprehensive Molecular Profiling for Clinical Outcome in Children With Recurrent Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Importance of Comprehensive Molecular Profiling for Clinical Outcome in Children With Recurrent Cancer
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fped.2018.00114
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olga Østrup, Karsten Nysom, David Scheie, Ane Y. Schmidt, Rene Mathiasen, Lisa L. Hjalgrim, Tina E. Olsen, Jane Skjøth-Rasmussen, Birthe M. Henriksen, Finn C. Nielsen, Peder S. Wehner, Henrik Schrøder, Astrid M. Sehested, Catherine Rechnitzer, Maria Rossing

Abstract

Purpose: Pediatric cancers are often difficult to classify and can be complex to treat. To ensure precise diagnostics and identify relevant treatment targets, we implemented comprehensive molecular profiling of consecutive pediatric patients with cancer relapse. We evaluated the clinical impact of extensive molecular profiling by assessing the frequency of identified biological onco-drivers, altered diagnosis, and/or identification of new relevant targeted therapies. Patients and Methods: Forty-six tumor samples (44 fresh-frozen; two formalin-fixed paraffin embedded), two bone marrow aspirates, three cerebrospinal fluid samples, and one archived DNA were obtained from 48 children (0-17 years; median 9.5) with relapsed or refractory cancer, where the disease was rapidly progressing in spite of their current treatment or they had exhausted all treatment options. The samples were analyzed by whole-exome sequencing (WES), RNA sequencing (RNAseq), transcriptome arrays, and SNP arrays. Final reports were available within 3-4 weeks after patient inclusion and included mutation status, a description of copy number alterations, differentially expressed genes, and gene fusions, as well as suggestions for targeted treatment. Results: Of the 48 patients, 33 had actionable findings. The most efficient method for the identification of actionable findings was WES (39%), followed by SNP array (37%). Of note, gene fusions were identified by RNAseq in 21% of the samples. Eleven findings led to clinical intervention, i.e., oncogenetic counseling, targeted treatment, and treatment based on changed diagnosis. Four patients received compassionate use targeted therapy. Six patients experienced direct benefits in the form of stable disease or response. Conclusion: The application of comprehensive genetic diagnostics in children with recurrent cancers allowed for discovery and implementation of effective targeted therapies and hereby improvement of outcome in some patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Master 3 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 10%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 5 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 14%
Neuroscience 2 10%
Computer Science 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 5 24%
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 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#14,276,692
of 23,323,574 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,981
of 6,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,056
of 327,734 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#58
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,323,574 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,300 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 327,734 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.