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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Primary alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma of the bone: two cases and review of the literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13000-016-0552-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Petra Balogh, Rita Bánusz, Monika Csóka, Zsófia Váradi, Edit Varga, Zoltán Sápi |
| Abstract |
Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is a malignant tumor of mesenchymal origin and comprises the largest category of soft-tissue sarcomas both in children and adolescents. From a pediatric oncology point of view, RMS has traditionally been classified into alveolar (ARMS) and embryonal (ERMS) subtypes. The anatomical localization of the tumor may vary, but commonly involve the head/neck regions, male and female urogenital tract or the trunk and extremities. Here, we report two challenging cases involving 17- and 9-years-olds males where diffuse and multiplex bone lesions suggested either a hematological disease or a primary bone tumor (mesenchymal chondrosarcoma). Biopsies, proved a massive infiltration of the bone marrow cavity with rhabdomyosarcoma. In both cases, the ARMS subtype was confirmed using FOXO1 break-apart probes (FISH). Radiological examination could not identify primary soft tissue component in any localization at the time of diagnosis in either cases. Primary alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma of the bone as a subtype of ARMS, seems to be a distinct clinico-pathological entity with challenging diagnostic difficulties and different, yet better, biological behavior in comparison to soft tissue ARMS. However, it is difficult to be characterized or predict its prognosis and long-term survival as only sporadic cases (four) were reported so far. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 33% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
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 20 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,525,196
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#231
of 1,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,875
of 316,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 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 316,804 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.