↓ Skip to main content

Lung cancer screening: from imaging to biomarker

Overview of attention for article published in Biomarker Research, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
Lung cancer screening: from imaging to biomarker
Published in
Biomarker Research, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/2050-7771-1-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dong Xiang, Bicheng Zhang, Donald Doll, Kui Shen, Goetz Kloecker, Carl Freter

Abstract

Despite several decades of intensive effort to improve the imaging techniques for lung cancer diagnosis and treatment, primary lung cancer is still the number one cause of cancer death in the United States and worldwide. The major causes of this high mortality rate are distant metastasis evident at diagnosis and ineffective treatment for locally advanced disease. Indeed, approximately forty percent of newly diagnosed lung cancer patients have distant metastasis. Currently, the only potential curative therapy is surgical resection of early stage lung cancer. Therefore, early detection of lung cancer could potentially increase the chance of cure by surgery and underlines the importance of screening and detection of lung cancer. In the past fifty years, screening of lung cancer by chest X-Ray (CXR), sputum cytology, computed tomography (CT), fluorescence endoscopy and low-dose spiral CT (LDCT) has not improved survival except for the recent report in 2010 by the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), which showed a 20 percent mortality reduction in high risk participants screened with LDCT compared to those screened with CXRs. Furthermore, serum biomarkers for detection of lung cancer using free circulating DNA and RNA, exosomal microRNA, circulating tumor cells and various lung cancer specific antigens have been studied extensively and novel screening methods are being developed with encouraging results. The history of lung cancer screening trials using CXR, sputum cytology and LDCT, as well as results of trials involving various serum biomarkers, are reviewed herein.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Netherlands 1 2%
India 1 2%
Unknown 58 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 21%
Student > Bachelor 12 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 6 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 January 2013.
All research outputs
#18,326,065
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Biomarker Research
#214
of 310 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,438
of 284,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomarker Research
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 310 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 284,977 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.