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 |
Treatment outcome of anti-angiogenesis through VEGF-pathway in the management of gastric cancer: a systematic review of phase II and III clinical trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-018-3137-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brian Mawalla, Xianglin Yuan, Xiaoxiao Luo, Phillip L. Chalya |
| Abstract |
Advanced gastric cancer poses a therapeutic challenge worldwide. In randomised clinical trials, anti-VEGF has been reported as an essential agent for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. This review aims at assessing the treatment outcome of anti-angiogenesis therapy through the VEGF pathway in the management of patients with advanced gastric cancer. During this review, 38 clinical trials were identified. Of these, 30 clinical trials were excluded, leaving eight trials of phase II and III. Ramucirumab, as a second line treatment of advanced gastric cancer, decreases the risk of disease progression (37-52%) and death (19-22%). Compare ramucirumab and bevacizumab in combination with traditional chemotherapy; ramucirumab has shown to improve progression-free survival and overall survival. Apatinib tyrosine kinase inhibitor combined with traditional chemotherapy has shown to improve overall response rate and progression-free survival with marginal improvements in overall survival. Chemotherapy, in combination with anti-VEGF drugs, in the management of advanced gastric cancer significantly improves the outcome of overall response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival when compared to chemotherapy alone. Therefore, we recommend that anti-VEGF drugs are the drugs of choice in the management of patients with advanced gastric cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Researcher | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 2018.
All research outputs
#4,436,939
of 24,960,237 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#647
of 4,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,153
of 455,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#29
of 179 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,960,237 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,473 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 455,268 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 179 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.