↓ Skip to main content

Regression of multifocoal in transit melanoma metastases after palliative resection of dominant masses and 2 years after treatment with ipilimumab

Overview of attention for article published in Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Regression of multifocoal in transit melanoma metastases after palliative resection of dominant masses and 2 years after treatment with ipilimumab
Published in
Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40425-017-0259-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raphael B. Moreira, Lana Hamieh, Evisa Gjini, Ana Lako, Katherine M. Krajewski, Charles H. Yoon, Patrick A. Ott

Abstract

Spontaneous regression of metastatic melanoma and delayed responses more than one year after treatment with ipilimumab are rarely seen. Here, we present the case of a patient with in transit metastases from cutaneous melanoma on his right lower extremity who achieved complete regression of all metastatic lesions 13 months after the first of two consecutive palliative resections of dominant masses and more than two years after treatment with ipilimumab. The exact cause of our patient's sudden onset of tumor regression remains speculative. We hypothesize that the operative trauma followed by the postoperative infections augmented an innate immune response.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 40%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 8 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 16 August 2017.
All research outputs
#4,154,154
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#1,094
of 3,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,061
of 325,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#14
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,422 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 325,319 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.