↓ Skip to main content

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and cancer: do they really look similar?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and cancer: do they really look similar?
Published in
BMC Medicine, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-015-0478-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlo Vancheri

Abstract

The aim of this opinion article is to understand to what extent idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) can be considered, in its clinical and pathogenic features, similar to cancer. Indeed, IPF has common risk factors with cancer, a low survival, and, most importantly, epigenetic and genetic alterations, abnormal expression of microRNAs, cellular and molecular aberrances, and the activation of similar signalling pathways. The pathogenic link between the two diseases may have a number of practical consequences. It may improve our understanding of IPF drawing on cancer biology knowledge. In addition, the recognition of similar pathogenic pathways may also encourage the use of cancer drugs for the treatment of IPF. Nintedanib, an inhibitor of tyrosine kinase receptors initially developed for cancer, has been recently approved for the treatment of IPF thanks to the observation that these receptors are also abnormally activated in IPF. The vision of IPF as a cancer-like disease may improve our understanding of the pathogenesis of this disease also opening new scenarios for repositioning cancer drugs for IPF. In addition, it may increase the level of awareness towards this dreadful disease at the public, political, and healthcare level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 19 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Psychology 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 22 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 01 September 2017.
All research outputs
#2,450,958
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,575
of 3,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,732
of 274,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#57
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 274,665 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.