↓ Skip to main content

Follow-up practices for high-grade extremity Osteosarcoma

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Follow-up practices for high-grade extremity Osteosarcoma
Published in
BMC Cancer, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2333-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian Rothermundt, Beatrice M. Seddon, Palma Dileo, Sandra J. Strauss, Joanne Coleman, Timothy W. Briggs, Sarah R. Haile, Jeremy S. Whelan

Abstract

The optimal conduct of follow-up (FU) of patients with osteosarcoma is uncertain. In the absence of any formal validation of optimal timing and method of surveillance, guidance is provided by oncology societies' recommendations. FU is designed to detect either local recurrence or metastatic disease at a time when early treatment is still possible and might be effective. We performed a retrospective analysis of 101 patients with high-grade extremity osteosarcoma in a single centre. Chest x-ray (CXR) was used as routine surveillance method; however patients with initial lung metastases or previous suspicious findings had computed tomography (CT) scans. With a median FU time of 30.7 months 34 patients relapsed. Relapse-free survival after 5 years was 61 % (CI 52 %; 73 %), late relapses occurred in only two patients between 2 and 5 years of FU. Twenty-five of the 34 relapses were detected at routine FU appointments. All 8 local recurrences were noted clinically. Twenty-two patients had metastases confined to the lungs, either detected on CXR or CT. Thirty-two percent of patients with lung metastases only were salvaged successfully. Routine FU in high-grade osteosarcoma results in clinical detection of local relapse, and detection of lung metastases by CXR at a time when metastatectomy is possible. The optimal time interval for FU appointments is not known, however we recommend more frequent surveillance visits during the two years after treatment. We hypothesize that routine CT scans are not required and propose CXR for detection of lung metastases.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 26%
Student > Postgraduate 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 61%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Mathematics 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,987,023
of 23,054,359 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#3,712
of 8,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,348
of 299,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#42
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,054,359 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,372 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 299,263 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.