↓ Skip to main content

The Current State of Clinical Application of Serum Biomarkers for Canine Lymphoma

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, September 2016
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

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
The Current State of Clinical Application of Serum Biomarkers for Canine Lymphoma
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2016.00087
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey N. Bryan

Abstract

Serum biomarkers of canine lymphoma activity for diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy monitoring have been of clinical interest for more than a decade. Tumor products, biochemical enzymes, cytokines, metabolic profiling, leakage enzymes, as well as serum proteins have been studied as biomarkers for lymphoma. Multiple biomarkers combined have been shown to be most sensitive and specific. C-reactive protein, thymidine kinase 1, and haptoglobin have been most extensively studied and commercialized in diagnostic tests, the TK Canine Cancer Panel and the Canine Lymphoma Blood Test. These tests have been evaluated either in cohorts of diseased and healthy dogs or in prospective studies of ill dogs, respectively, for application to clinical decision-making. Some evidence exists for application of these tests, but large-scale studies are lacking in a broad range of lymphoma forms. These biomarkers are commonly elevated at diagnosis and at relapse. Further study is necessary to determine if early intervention guided by biomarker elevation will improve quantity or quality of life for dogs with lymphoma.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Other 7 9%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 23 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 31 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 27 36%
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 23 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,210,614
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#2,269
of 6,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,178
of 322,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#21
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 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 6,269 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 322,482 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.