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 |
Intraductal tubular adenomas (pyloric gland-type) of the pancreas: clinicopathologic features are similar to gastric-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms and different from intraductal tubulopapillary neoplasms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13000-014-0172-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaoyan Chang, Ying Jiang, Ji Li, Jie Chen |
| Abstract |
BackgroundIntraductal tubular adenoma of the pancreas, pyloric gland type (ITA), is an infrequent intraductal benign lesion located in the main duct and large branch duct of the pancreas. The purpose of this report is to introduce seven new cases and to compare their clinicopathologic features and KRAS mutations to gastric-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) and intraductal tubulopapillary neoplasms (ITPNs).MethodsClinical findings, morphologic features, immunophenotypes and KRAS alterations were investigated in 7 patients with intraductal tubular adenomas, 16 patients with gastric-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms and 6 patients with intraductal tubulopapillary neoplasms.ResultsThere were more female patients in the ITA and gastric-type IPMN groups, whereas the opposite pattern was observed in the ITPN group. ITAs and gastric-type IPMNs were lined by columnar cells, similar to pyloric glands, with large extracellular deposits of mucin. ITPNs were polypoid and papillary mass located in the pancreatic ducts, which did not show large deposits of mucin. All ITAs and gastric-type IPMNs expressed MUC5AC strongly and diffusely, and 3/6 ITPNs expressed MUC5AC focally and weakly. KRAS mutations were identified in 4 ITAs (4/7, 57%), 9 IPMNs (9/16, 56%) and 2 ITPNs (2/6, 33%).ConclusionThe intraductal tubular adenoma should not be considered a precursor lesion of intraductal tubulopapillary neoplasms. No adequate data established ITA should separate as a specific entity from IPMNs.Virtual SlidesThe virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/13000_2014_172. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 38% |
| Researcher | 3 | 23% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 46% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
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 24 September 2014.
All research outputs
#14,201,088
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#420
of 1,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,173
of 251,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#7
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,123 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 57% 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 251,975 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 67% of its contemporaries.