↓ Skip to main content

Response biomarkers: re-envisioning the approach to tailoring drug therapy for cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Response biomarkers: re-envisioning the approach to tailoring drug therapy for cancer
Published in
BMC Cancer, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2886-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shahil Amin, Oliver F. Bathe

Abstract

The rapidly expanding arsenal of chemotherapeutic agents approved in the past 5 years represents significant progress in the field. However, this poses a challenge for oncologists to choose which drug or combination of drugs is best for any individual. Because only a fraction of patients respond to any drug, efforts have been made to devise strategies to personalize care. The majority of efforts have involved development of predictive biomarkers. While there are notable successes, there are no predictive biomarkers for most drugs. Moreover, predictive biomarkers enrich the cohort of individuals likely to benefit; they do not guarantee benefit. There is a need to devise alternate strategies to tailor cancer care. One alternative approach is to enhance the current adaptive approach, which involves administration of a drug and cessation of treatment once progression is documented. This currently involves radiographic tests for the most part, which are expensive, inconvenient and imperfect in their ability to categorize patients who are and are not benefiting from treatment. A biomarker approach to categorizing response may have advantages. Herein, we discuss the state of the art on treatment response assessment. While the most mature technologies for response assessment involve radiographic tests such as CT and PET, reports are emerging on biomarkers used to monitor therapeutic efficacy. Potentially, response biomarkers represent a less expensive and more convenient means of monitoring therapy, although an ideal response biomarker has not yet been described. A framework for future response biomarker discovery is described.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 68 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 23%
Student > Bachelor 12 17%
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Master 9 13%
Professor 3 4%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 14 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 05 December 2017.
All research outputs
#1,589,056
of 12,253,439 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#335
of 4,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,612
of 332,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#15
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,253,439 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,494 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 332,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.