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.
X Demographics
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Genetic analysis for mucinous ovarian carcinoma with infiltrative and expansile invasion and mucinous borderline tumor: a retrospective analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, April 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13000-023-01340-w |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Taira Hada, Morikazu Miyamoto, Yuka Ohtsuka, Jin Suminokura, Tsubasa Ito, Naohisa Kishimoto, Soko Nishitani, Minori Takada, Akari Imauji, Risa Tanabe, Masashi Takano |
| Abstract |
Mucinous carcinoma (MC) is a histological subtype of ovarian cancer that has a worse prognosis at advanced stages than the most prevalent histological subtype, high-grade serous carcinomas. Invasive patterns have been recognized as prognostic factors for MCs. MCs with infiltrative invasion were more aggressive than those with expansile invasion. MC with an expansile pattern exhibited behavior similar to mucinous borderline tumors (MBT). However, genomic analysis of invasive patterns is insufficient. This study aimed to compare genetic information between groups with MC and infiltrative invasion (Group A) and those with MC with expansile invasion or MBT (Group B). Ten cases each of MC with infiltrative invasion, MC with expansile invasion, and MBT between 2005 and 2020 were identified. Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues was performed, and cases with DNA fragmentation or the possibility of DNA fragmentation were excluded. Mutant base candidates and tumor mutation burden (TMB) values (mutations/megabase) were calculated. After assessing the quality of purified DNA, seven cases of MC with infiltrative invasion, five cases of MC with expansile invasion, and three cases of MBT were included. More patients in group A experienced recurrence or progression (p < 0.01) and died of disease (p = 0.03). Moreover, the TMB value was statistically higher in group A than in group B (p = 0.049). There were no statistical differences in the incidence of the mutations of KRAS, TP53, and CREBBP. KRAS, TP53, and CREBBP mutations were discovered in 8/15 (53.3%), 6/15 (40.0%), and 5/15 (33.3%) cases, respectively. Genetic analysis revealed that Group A had higher TMB than Group B. Therefore, this result might be useful for future treatment. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
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 21 April 2023.
All research outputs
#16,310,889
of 25,756,531 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#464
of 1,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,450
of 416,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#2
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,756,531 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,198 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 416,526 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.