↓ Skip to main content

Bringing new medicines to women with epithelial ovarian cancer: what is the unmet medical need?

Overview of attention for article published in Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Bringing new medicines to women with epithelial ovarian cancer: what is the unmet medical need?
Published in
Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40661-017-0050-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas J. Herzog, Bradley J. Monk

Abstract

Therapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (OC) includes first line platinum/taxane-containing chemotherapy and re-treatment with platinum-containing regimens for disease recurrence in patients likely to respond again. Single-agent, non-platinum, cytotoxic agents are commonly used to treat patients resistant to platinum retreatment, but these agents are associated with dose-limiting toxicities and response rates below 20%. Recent advances have led to novel targeted treatments for recurrent OC that offer opportunities to improve response rates and prolong progression-free intervals. However, they also add complexity to the process of selecting treatment for individual patients at different stages of the disease process. Advanced and recurrent OC is rarely cured. Multiple lines of platinum combinations, and nonplatinum chemotherapeutics eventually fail to achieve clinical benefit, thus other active and tolerable systemic therapies are needed. Consequently, the US Food and Drug Administration has created a mechanism for "accelerated approval" of new medicines in situations of high unmet medical need. We review the clinical implications of recent key clinical studies in these settings and outline the path forward for study design and approval of novel therapeutics to treat recurrent OC.

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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 24%
Researcher 4 19%
Other 2 10%
Lecturer 1 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 7 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Chemical Engineering 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 6 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 October 2017.
All research outputs
#3,329,869
of 11,862,957 outputs
Outputs from Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice
#9
of 25 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,894
of 270,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,862,957 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one scored the same or higher as 16 of them.
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 270,417 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them