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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Does age really matter? Radiotherapy in elderly patients with glioblastoma, the Munich experience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Oncology, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13014-017-0809-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christoph Straube, Hagen Scherb, Jens Gempt, Stefanie Bette, Claus Zimmer, Friederike Schmidt-Graf, Jürgen Schlegel, Bernhard Meyer, Stephanie E. Combs |
| Abstract |
Glioblastoma is usually diagnosed around the age of 60-70 years. Patients older than 65 years are frequently described as "elderly". Several trials with monotherapy have established treatment regimens that offer therapies with reduced side effects but reduced efficacy. We analysed the outcome of elderly glioblastoma patients treated at our facility. We performed a retrospective analysis of 62 consecutive patients older than 65 years treated for a primary glioblastoma at our facility from 2009 to 2015. Median age was 69.6 years (range 65.1-85.6 years); median OS of the entire cohort was 10.9 months. ECOG, MGMT and extent of resection but not age and the time from surgery to radiotherapy were associated with longer survival. Patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy had a significantly longer survival (20.5 vs. 7.8 months). Furthermore, salvage therapies were associated with significant improved survival when compared to Best Supportive Care (22.3 vs. 8.8 months). Also elderly patients are likely to benefit from an aggressive treatment after primary diagnosis of glioblastoma. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 9 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 44% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 41% |
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 10 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,457,417
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,058
of 2,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,405
of 310,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#9
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,066 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 310,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 60% of its contemporaries.