↓ Skip to main content

Malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the femur: a case report and literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic Pathology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the femur: a case report and literature review
Published in
Diagnostic Pathology, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13000-015-0292-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

I Weng Lao, Lin Yu, Jian Wang

Abstract

We describe a case of malignant perivascular epithelial cell tumor (PEComa) arising primarily in the distal left femur of a 47-year-old male. The patient presented with pain accompanied by progressive swelling of his left thigh. Computed tomography (CT) scan and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed an osteolytic lesion. Curettage of the lesion was reported as a clear cell tumor with recommendation for exclusion of a metastatic clear cell carcinoma. However, thorough examinations did not find any primary site elsewhere, apart from the presence of bilateral pulmonary metastases. Evaluation of the submitted H & E slides identified a malignant PEComa which was further confirmed by subsequent immunohistochemical study. The occurrence of PEComa as a primary bone lesion is extremely rare. We present here a malignant PEComa of the distal left femur, and summarize the clinicopathological characteristics of this rare entity with literature review. The virtual slide (s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/5729035221600545 .

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 5 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 December 2020.
All research outputs
#7,523,962
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#231
of 1,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,953
of 266,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#24
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,135 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 266,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 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 64% of its contemporaries.