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 |
Additional value of 18F-FDG PET/CT response evaluation in axillary nodes during neoadjuvant therapy for triple-negative and HER2-positive breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Imaging, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40644-017-0117-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mette S. van Ramshorst, Suzana C. Teixeira, Bas B. Koolen, Kenneth E. Pengel, Kenneth G. Gilhuijs, Jelle Wesseling, Sjoerd Rodenhuis, Renato A. Valdés Olmos, Emiel J. Rutgers, Wouter V. Vogel, Gabe S. Sonke, Marie-Jeanne T. Vrancken Peeters |
| Abstract |
(18)F-FDG PET/CT can monitor metabolic activity in early breast cancer during neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST), but it is unknown if the metabolic breast and axillary response differ. We evaluated the correlation between metabolic breast and axillary response at various time points during NST. Furthermore, we analysed if the combined metabolic response improves pathologic complete response (pCR) prediction compared to using the metabolic breast response alone. (18)F-FDG PET/CT was performed at baseline (PET1), 2-3 weeks (PET2), and 6-8 weeks (PET3) of NST in patients with triple-negative (TN) and HER2-positive node-positive breast cancer. SUVmax and ∆SUVmax were determined separately for breast and axilla. Spearman's correlation coefficients (r) between both localisations were calculated. The accuracy of pCR total (ypT0/is,ypN0) prediction using the metabolic response in breast, axilla or both was examined using logistic regression analysis. Hundred-five patients were included: 45 TN and 60 HER2-positive tumours. The metabolic response in breast and axilla correlated moderately in TN tumours (r = 0.57) using ∆SUVmax between PET1-PET3 and poorly in HER2-positive tumours (r = 0.49) using SUVmax at PET2. In TN tumours, metabolic breast response predicted pCR well without improvement after adding axillary response (c-index 0.82 versus 0.85, p = 0.63). In HER2-positive tumours, metabolic breast response predicted pCR poorly with improvement after adding axillary response (c-index 0.64 versus 0.72, p = 0.06). (18)F-FDG PET/CT response during NST differs between breast and axilla. In TN tumours, pCR total prediction can be made independent of metabolic axillary response. In HER2-positive tumours, axillary response may improve pCR total prediction. These findings may help guide PET/CT-response-based changes during NST. NTR NTR1797 . Registered 29 May 2009, retrospectively registered. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 19% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 13 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 44% |
| Psychology | 4 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 January 2018.
All research outputs
#16,061,963
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Imaging
#238
of 674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,515
of 327,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Imaging
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 674 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 327,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.