↓ Skip to main content

Ciliated muconodular papillary tumors of the lung with KRAS/BRAF/AKT1 mutation

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic Pathology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Ciliated muconodular papillary tumors of the lung with KRAS/BRAF/AKT1 mutation
Published in
Diagnostic Pathology, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13000-017-0651-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emiko Udo, Bungo Furusato, Kazuko Sakai, Leah M Prentice, Tomonori Tanaka, Yuka Kitamura, Tomoshi Tsuchiya, Naoya Yamasaki, Takeshi Nagayasu, Kazuto Nishio, Junya Fukuoka

Abstract

Ciliated muconodular papillary tumors (CMPTs) are newly recognized rare peripheral lung nodules that are histologically characterized by ciliated columnar, goblet, and basal cells. Although recent studies have shown that CMPTs constitute a neoplastic disease, the complete histogenesis of CMPTs is not fully understood and molecular data are limited. We reviewed four cases of CMPT and performed immunohistochemical and genomic analyses to establish CMPT profiles. All cases were positive for hepatocyte nuclear factor-4α and mucin 5B and negative for programmed death ligand 1 expression, as determined by immunohistochemistry. The genetic analysis revealed three pathogenic mutations (BRAF V600E, AKT1 E17K, and KRAS G12D), with the KRAS mutation reported here for the first time. Histological and genetic profiles indicate that CMPTs are likely neoplastic and exhibit features similar to mucinous adenocarcinoma. This suggests that some CMPTs may be a precursor lesion of mucinous adenocarcinoma.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Other 2 17%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 July 2019.
All research outputs
#13,214,842
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#332
of 1,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,327
of 317,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#6
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,135 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 317,366 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 68% of its contemporaries.