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 |
Genetic variants of DNA repair genes predict the survival of patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer receiving platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12967-016-0903-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fei Zhou, Meiling Zhu, Mengyun Wang, Lixin Qiu, Lei Cheng, Ming Jia, Jiaqing Xiang, Qingyi Wei |
| Abstract |
Adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resected esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) remains controversial for its uncertain role in improving overall survival (OS). Nucleotide excision repair (NER) removes DNA-adducts in tumor cells induced by the platinum-based chemotherapy and thus may modulate efficacy of the treatment. The present study evaluated if single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of NER genes were prognostic biomarkers in ESCC patients treated with platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy (PAC). The analysis included 572 patients, for whom six SNPs of NER genes [i.e., XPC (rs1870134 and rs2228001), ERCC2/XPD rs238406 and ERCC5/XPG (rs2094258, rs2296147 and rs873601)] were detected with the TaqMan assay. Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate their associations with disease free survival (DFS) and OS of these ESCC patients receiving PAC. Receiving operating characteristic curve analysis was used to evaluate the role of the risk genotypes in the DFS and OS. We found that ERCC5/XPG rs2094258 and rs873601 and ERCC2/XPD rs238406 SNPs were independently associated with poorer DFS and OS of ESCC patients [ERCC5/XPG rs2094258: CT+TT vs. CC: adjusted hazards ratio (adjHR) = 1.68 and P = 0.012 for DFS; adjHR = 1.99 and P = 0.0001 for OS; ERCC5/XPG rs873601: GA+GG vs. AA: adjHR = 1.59 and P = 0.024 for DFS; adjHR = 1.91 and P = 0.0005 for OS; ERCC2/XPD rs238406: TT vs. GG+GT: adjHR = 1.43 and P = 0.020 for DFS; adjHR = 1.52 and P = 0.008 for OS]. These HRs increased as the number of risk genotypes increased in the combined analysis. The model combining the risk genotypes with clinical characteristics or the TNM stage system was better in predicting outcomes in ESCC patients with PAC. SNPs of ERCC2/XPD and ERCC5/XPG may independently and jointly predict survival of ESCC patients treated with PAC in this study population. Further validation in other study populations is warranted. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 31% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 19% |
| Librarian | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 25% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 19% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 38% |
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 31 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,376,252
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,238
of 4,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,506
of 338,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#77
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,004 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 338,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.