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 |
Survival is influenced by approaches to local treatment of Ewing sarcoma within an international randomised controlled trial: analysis of EICESS-92
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Sarcoma Research, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13569-018-0093-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jeremy Whelan, Allan Hackshaw, Anne McTiernan, Robert Grimer, David Spooner, Jessica Bate, Andreas Ranft, Michael Paulussen, Herbert Juergens, Alan Craft, Ian Lewis |
| Abstract |
Two national clinical trial groups, United Kingdom Children's Cancer and Leukaemia Group (CCLG) and the German Paediatric Oncology and Haematology Group (GPOH) together undertook a randomised trial, EICESS-92, which addressed chemotherapy options for Ewing's sarcoma. We sought the causes of unexpected survival differences between the study groups. 647 patients were randomised. Cox regression analyses were used to compare event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two study groups. 5-year EFS rates were 43% (95% CI 36-50%) and 57% (95% CI 52-62) in the CCLG and GPOH patients, respectively; corresponding 5-year OS rates were 52% (95% CI 45-59%) and 66% (95% CI 61-71). CCLG patients were less likely to have both surgery and radiotherapy (18 vs. 59%), and more likely to have a single local therapy modality compared to the GPOH patients (72 vs. 35%). Forty-five percent of GPOH patients had pre-operative radiotherapy compared to 3% of CCLG patients. In the CCLG group local recurrence (either with or without metastases) was the first event in 22% of patients compared with 7% in the GPOH group. After allowing for the effects of age, metastases, primary site, histology and local treatment modality, the risk of an EFS event was 44% greater in the CCLG cohort (95% CI 10-89%, p = 0.009), and the risk of dying was 30% greater, but not statistically significant (95% CI 3-74%, p = 0.08). Unexpected differences in EFS and OS occurred between two patient cohorts recruited within an international randomised trial. Failure to select or deliver appropriate local treatment modalities for Ewing's sarcoma may compromise chances of cure.Trial registrationSupported by Deutsche Krebshilfe (Grants No. DKH M43/92/Jü2 and DKH 70-2551 Jü3), and European Union Biomedicine and Health Programme (Grants No. BMH1-CT92-1341 and BMH4-983956), and Cancer Research United Kingdom. Clinical trial information can be found for the following: NCT0000251. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 17% |
| Researcher | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 61% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 33% |
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 04 April 2018.
All research outputs
#13,353,282
of 23,036,991 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Sarcoma Research
#40
of 104 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,383
of 329,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Sarcoma Research
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,036,991 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 104 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 329,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.