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 |
Prognostic factors and multidisciplinary treatment modalities for brain metastases from colorectal cancer: analysis of 93 patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-015-1933-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiao-Dong Gu, Yan-Tao Cai, Yi-Ming Zhou, Zhen-Yang Li, Jian-Bin Xiang, Zong-You Chen |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to review patient characteristics and evaluate the potential factors affecting prognosis in cases of brain metastasis (BM) from colorectal cancer (CRC). We retrospectively reviewed 93 cases of BM from CRC in our hospital. Patient demographics, neurologic symptoms, and location and number of BMs were recorded. Factors analyzed included: age; sex; Karnofsky performance score; number of BMs; presence of extracranial metastases; dimensions; location of tumors; treatment modalities. The overall 1- and 2-year survival rates were 27.7 and 9.9 %. On multivariate analysis, the number of BMs, extracranial metastases and the initial treatment modalities were found to be independent prognostic factors for overall survival. Patients treated with surgical resection followed by WBRT or SRS had an improved prognosis relative to those treated with surgery alone (P = 0.02 and P = 0.02, respectively). No significance difference in survival rate was found between patients treated with SRS alone or SRS plus WBRT (P = 0.11). Surgical resection of BMs from CRC in selected patients may help prolong survival. Additional radiotherapy following surgery is valuable in improving prognosis. Extracranial metastasis, multiple BM lesions and initial non operation can be considered as independent factors associated with poor prognosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 50% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 42% |
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 16 November 2015.
All research outputs
#19,054,237
of 23,613,071 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#5,567
of 8,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,899
of 253,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#171
of 268 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,613,071 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 8,487 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 253,558 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 268 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.