↓ Skip to main content

EGFR inhibition in non-small cell lung cancer: current evidence and future directions

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
EGFR inhibition in non-small cell lung cancer: current evidence and future directions
Published in
Biomarker Research, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/2050-7771-1-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander Chi, Scot Remick, William Tse

Abstract

EGFR inhibition has emerged to be an important strategy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and mono-clonal antibodies (mAbs) to the EGFR have been tested in multiple large randomized phase III studies alone or combined with chemotherapy, as well as small phase I-II studies which investigated their efficacy as radiosensitizers when combined with radiotherapy. In this review, we described the current clinical outcome after treatment with EGFR TKIs and mAbs alone or combined with chemotherapy in advanced stage NSCLC, as well as the early findings in feasibility/phase I or II studies regarding to whether EGFR TKI or mAb can be safely and effectively combined with radiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced NSCLC. Furthermore, we explore the potential predictive biomarkers for response to EGFR TKIs or mAbs in NSCLC patients based on the findings in the current clinical trials; the mechanisms of resistance to EGFR inhibition; and the strategies of augmenting the antitumor activity of the EGFR inhibitors alone or when combined with chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Slovenia 1 2%
Unknown 49 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 10%
Chemistry 5 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 December 2013.
All research outputs
#18,355,685
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Biomarker Research
#214
of 310 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,558
of 285,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomarker Research
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 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 4.3. 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 285,081 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.