↓ Skip to main content

NatHER: protocol for systematic evaluation of trends in survival among patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
NatHER: protocol for systematic evaluation of trends in survival among patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer
Published in
Systematic Reviews, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0118-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eli J. Korner, Anne Morris, Isabel Elaine Allen, Sara Hurvitz, Mary S. Beattie, Bindu Kalesan

Abstract

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is an aggressive form of breast cancer and is historically associated with poor outcomes compared with HER2-negative MBC. Since 1998, four drugs have been globally approved for the targeted treatment of HER2-positive MBC. Additional advances in patient care-such as improved breast cancer screening, HER2 testing, and supportive care-have also occurred. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine whether there has been a cumulative change in survival over time in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer based on results from interventional clinical trials (ICTs) and observational studies and to compare outcomes across these types of studies. A systematic search of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be performed. Two investigators will independently assess each abstract for inclusion. English language reports of ICTs and observational studies that include patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer from 1987 onwards will be considered. The primary outcome of interest is overall survival; secondary outcomes include progression-free survival and safety. Data on clinical outcomes, as well as on study design, study population, treatment/intervention, methodological quality, and outcomes, will be extracted using a structured codebook developed by the authors for this study. Standard and cumulative random effects meta-analysis will be performed to derive pooled risk estimates, both overall and by study design, controlling for covariates such as aggregate demographic and clinical characteristics of patients, treatment/intervention, and study characteristics. Heterogeneity of studies will be evaluated using the I(2) statistic. Differences in risk estimates by quality characteristics will be performed using meta-regression. This study will evaluate current and evolving trends in survival associated with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer over nearly 30 years and will build upon prior, less comprehensive, systematic analyses. This information is important to patients, healthcare providers, and researchers, particularly in the advanced disease setting, in which new therapies have been recently approved. Including observational studies allows us to evaluate real-world effectiveness; useful information will be gained by comparing findings from observational studies with those from ICTs. PROSPERO CRD42014014345.

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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 16%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Master 3 12%
Professor 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 5 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 20%

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 03 October 2015.
All research outputs
#5,470,684
of 6,422,619 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#450
of 497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,297
of 203,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#38
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,422,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 203,551 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.