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 |
The impact of HER2 phenotype of circulating tumor cells in metastatic breast cancer: a retrospective study in 107 patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-015-1423-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Markus Wallwiener, Andreas Daniel Hartkopf, Sabine Riethdorf, Juliane Nees, Martin Ronald Sprick, Birgitt Schönfisch, Florin-Andrei Taran, Jörg Heil, Christof Sohn, Klaus Pantel, Andreas Trumpp, Andreas Schneeweiss |
| Abstract |
In metastatic breast cancer (MBC), antigen profiles of metastatic tissue and primary tumor differ in up to 20 % of patients. Reassessment of predictive markers, including human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression, might help to optimize MBC treatment. While tissue sampling is invasive and often difficult to repeat, circulating tumor cell (CTC) analysis requires only a blood sample and might provide an easy-to-repeat, real-time "liquid biopsy" approach. The present retrospective study was conducted to compare HER2 expression in primary tumors, metastatic tissue, and circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from MBC patients and to analyze the potential impact of HER2 overexpression by CTCs on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in MBC. CTC-positive (five or more CTCs/7.5 mL blood; CellSearch®, Janssen Diagnostics) MBC patients starting a new line of systemic treatment were eligible for the study. HER2 status of CTCs was determined by immunofluorescence (CellSearch®). HER2 status of primary (PRIM) and metastatic (MET) tumor tissue was determined by immunohistochemistry. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier plots. One hundred seven patients (median age (range) 57 (33-81) years) were included. 100/107 (93 %) patients were followed-up for a median [95 % confidence interval (CI)] of 28.5 [25.1-40.1] months. Of 37/107 (35 %) CTC-HER2-positive patients only 10 (27 %) were PRIM-HER2-positive. 6/46 (13 %) patients were MET-HER2-positive; only 2/10 (20 %) CTC-HER2-positive patients were MET-HER2-positive. Overall accuracy between CTC-HER2 expression and PRIM-HER2 and MET-HER2 status was 69 % and 74 %, respectively. Kaplan-Meier plots of PFS and OS by CTC-HER2 status revealed significantly longer median [95 % CI] PFS of CTC-HER2-positive versus CTC-HER2-negative patients (7.4 [4.7-13.7] versus 4.34 [3.5-5.9] months; p = 0.035). CTC-HER2-positive status showed no significant difference for OS (13.7 [7.7-30.0] versus 8.7 [5.9-15.3] months; p = 0.287). HER2 status can change during the course of breast cancer. CTC phenotyping may serve as an easy-to-perform "liquid biopsy" to reevaluate HER2 status and potentially guide treatment decisions. Further, prospective studies are needed. |
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 States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 2 | 3% |
| Ireland | 2 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Egypt | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 21% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 18 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 12% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 29% |
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 23 May 2015.
All research outputs
#13,225,615
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#2,806
of 8,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,002
of 265,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#64
of 224 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 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 8,440 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 265,504 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 224 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 70% of its contemporaries.