↓ Skip to main content

Clinical implications of c-maf expression in plasma cells from patients with multiple myeloma

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Hematology & Oncology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Clinical implications of c-maf expression in plasma cells from patients with multiple myeloma
Published in
Experimental Hematology & Oncology, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40164-017-0076-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

GuoQing Wei, LiJun Wang, HanJin Yang, XiaoYan Han, GaoFeng Zheng, WeiYan Zheng, Jie Sun, JiMin Shi, WenJun Wu, Yi Zhao, DongHua He, Bo Wang, Zhen Cai, JingSong He

Abstract

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a type of hematological malignancy with significant heterogeneity in clinical features and prognosis. Cytogenetic abnormalities are the major factors affecting patient outcomes. Studies have shown that immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based detection of cancer-related genes expression could be alternative indicators for the prognosis of MM. Nuclear expression of c-maf protein in the bone marrow plasma cells of 128 multiple myeloma patients were examined by IHC, and its association with the clinicopathological features of MM patients was analyzed as well. Among the 128 patients, the positive rate of c-maf protein expression was up to 30.5%, which had no correlation with patient age, M protein type, Durie-Salmon staging system, the International Staging System, abnormal plasma cell ratio in the bone marrow, or the level of peripheral blood hemoglobin, serum calcium or lactate dehydrogenase. However, the c-maf-positive patients had a significantly higher rate of hypoproteinemia (p = 0.026) and higher serum β2-microglobulin levels (>2500 μg/L) (p = 0.007). Patients with negative c-maf expression had higher remission rates upon the treatment of non-bortezomib-based regimens although no effect of c-maf expression on progression-free survival or overall survival was observed. Patients with negative c-maf expression had higher remission rates upon the treatment of non-bortezomib-based regimens although no effect of c-maf expression on survival was observed. A further large-scale prospective study is required to verify these findings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Student > Postgraduate 3 19%
Student > Master 2 13%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 13%
Computer Science 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 25%

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 02 June 2017.
All research outputs
#18,552,700
of 22,977,819 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Hematology & Oncology
#207
of 298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,876
of 313,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Hematology & Oncology
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,977,819 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 298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 313,455 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.