↓ Skip to main content

Non-invasive real-time biopsy of intracranial lesions using short time expanded circulating tumor cells on glass slide: report of two cases

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Non-invasive real-time biopsy of intracranial lesions using short time expanded circulating tumor cells on glass slide: report of two cases
Published in
BMC Neurology, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12883-016-0652-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. Malara, G. Guzzi, C. Mignogna, V. Trunzo, C. Camastra, A. Della Torre, A. Di Vito, A. M. Lavecchia, M. Gliozzi, C. Ceccotti, G. Volpentesta, A. Lavano, G. Donato, V Mollace

Abstract

Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs) are promising biomarkers for monitoring solid cancer and were used to monitor brain tumors. Here we report two cases in which, for the first time, CTCs were used in cytological diagnostic evaluation to discriminate a space-occupying lesion of the brain. Two cases of focal intracranial lesions, unclassified for diagnosis, untreated and apparently symptomatic, were examined after high-contrast resolution Magnetic Resonance Imaging and/or Computed Tomography scans. CTCs were seeded on chamber slides and short-time expanded under the optimized conditions as we previously reported. The first case was a focal lesion localized in the parietal-occipital area in a 67-year-old woman. The second case was a 31-year-old man with an expansive intracerebral lesion localized in the left peri-trigonal area. Both patients underwent excisional biopsy. Histopathological evaluation of the biopsy confirmed the previous cytological diagnoses, and the analysis of the clinical outcomes retrospectively validated both diagnoses. The cases here reported illustrate the potential for using expanded CTCs as non-invasive, real-time biopsy. Moreover, non-invasive real-time biopsy can represent an alternative diagnostic tool to be used when a functional area of the brain is at risk of injury from excisional biopsy procedures.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 10 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 42%
Neuroscience 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 32%
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 02 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,858,030
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,355
of 2,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,394
of 364,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#47
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,440 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 364,241 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.