↓ Skip to main content

The prognostic value of expression of HIF1α, EGFR and VEGF-A, in localized prostate cancer for intermediate- and high-risk patients treated with radiation therapy with or without androgen deprivation…

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
The prognostic value of expression of HIF1α, EGFR and VEGF-A, in localized prostate cancer for intermediate- and high-risk patients treated with radiation therapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy
Published in
Radiation Oncology, April 2012
DOI 10.1186/1748-717x-7-66
Pubmed ID
Authors

Damien C Weber, Jean-Christophe Tille, Christophe Combescure, Jean-François Egger, Mahomet Laouiti, Karim Hammad, Perrine Granger, Laura Rubbia-Brandt, Raymond Miralbell

Abstract

Androgens stimulate the production of hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF1α) and ultimately vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF-A). Additionally, epithelial growth factor (EGF) mediates HIF1α production. Carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX) expression is associated with tumor cell hypoxia in a variety of malignancies. This study assesses the prognostic relation between HIF1α, VEGF-A, EGF Receptor and CAIX expression by immunochemistry in diagnostic samples of patients with intermediate- and high-risk localized prostate cancer treated with radiation therapy, with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 7 20%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 12 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 14 June 2017.
All research outputs
#7,170,522
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#390
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,707
of 162,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#2
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 162,569 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.