↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of ultra-deep targeted sequencing for personalized breast cancer care

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Evaluation of ultra-deep targeted sequencing for personalized breast cancer care
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/bcr3584
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olivier Harismendy, Richard B Schwab, Hakan Alakus, Shawn E Yost, Hiroko Matsui, Farnaz Hasteh, Anne M Wallace, Hannah L Park, Lisa Madlensky, Barbara Parker, Philip M Carpenter, Kristen Jepsen, Hoda Anton-Culver, Kelly A Frazer

Abstract

The increasing number of targeted therapies, together with a deeper understanding of cancer genetics and drug response, have prompted major healthcare centers to implement personalized treatment approaches relying on high-throughput tumor DNA sequencing. However, the optimal way to implement this transformative methodology is not yet clear. Current assays may miss important clinical information such as the mutation allelic fraction, the presence of sub-clones or chromosomal rearrangements, or the distinction between inherited variants and somatic mutations. Here, we present the evaluation of ultra-deep targeted sequencing (UDT-Seq) to generate and interpret the molecular profile of 38 breast cancer patients from two academic medical centers.

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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 40%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 14%
Computer Science 4 8%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 7 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 September 2020.
All research outputs
#4,589,997
of 17,108,355 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#632
of 1,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,734
of 270,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#8
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,108,355 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,686 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 270,996 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 70% of its contemporaries.