↓ Skip to main content

Paediatric Chordomas

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Paediatric Chordomas
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13023-015-0340-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kévin Beccaria, Christian Sainte-Rose, Michel Zerah, Stéphanie Puget

Abstract

Paediatric chordomas are rare malignant tumours arising from primitive notochordal remnants with a high rate of recurrence. Only 5 % of them occur in the first two decades such less than 300 paediatric cases have been reported so far in the literature. In children, the average age at diagnosis is 10 years with a male-to-female ratio closed to 1. On the opposite to adults, the majority of paediatric chordomas are intracranial, characteristically centered on the sphenooccipital synchondrosis. Metastatic spread seems to be the prerogative of the under 5-year-old children with more frequent sacro-coccygeal locations and undifferentiated histology. The clinical presentation depends entirely on the tumour location. The most common presenting symptoms are diplopia and signs of raised intracranial pressure. Sacrococcygeal forms may present with an ulcerated subcutaneous mass, radicular pain, bladder and bowel dysfunctions. Diagnosis is suspected on computerised tomography showing the bone destruction and with typically lobulated appearance, hyperintense on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Today, treatment relies on as complete surgical resection as possible (rarely achieved because of frequent invasiveness of functional structures) followed by adjuvant radiotherapy by proton therapy. The role of chemotherapy has not been proven. Prognosis is better than in adults and depends on the extent of surgical resection, age and histology subgroup. Biological markers are still lacking to improve prognosis by developing targeted therapy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 16%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Professor 3 8%
Other 12 32%
Unknown 2 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 62%
Neuroscience 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 3 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 September 2015.
All research outputs
#13,230,487
of 16,649,395 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,465
of 1,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,873
of 251,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,649,395 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 251,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.