↓ Skip to main content

Treatment of medulloblastoma using an oncolytic measles virus encoding the thyroidal sodium iodide symporter shows enhanced efficacy with radioiodine

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Treatment of medulloblastoma using an oncolytic measles virus encoding the thyroidal sodium iodide symporter shows enhanced efficacy with radioiodine
Published in
BMC Cancer, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-12-508
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian Hutzen, Christopher R Pierson, Stephen J Russell, Evanthia Galanis, Corey Raffel, Adam W Studebaker

Abstract

Medulloblastoma is the most common malignant brain tumor of childhood. Although the clinical outcome for medulloblastoma patients has improved significantly, children afflicted with the disease frequently suffer from debilitating side effects related to the aggressive nature of currently available therapy. Alternative means for treating medulloblastoma are desperately needed. We have previously shown that oncolytic measles virus (MV) can selectively target and destroy medulloblastoma tumor cells in localized and disseminated models of the disease. MV-NIS, an oncolytic measles virus that encodes the human thyroidal sodium iodide symporter (NIS), has the potential to deliver targeted radiotherapy to the tumor site and promote a localized bystander effect above and beyond that achieved by MV alone.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 20%
Student > Master 8 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 27%
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 January 2013.
All research outputs
#13,876,020
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#3,192
of 8,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,784
of 183,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#48
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 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 8,249 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 183,514 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 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.