↓ Skip to main content

Guidelines for Rational Cancer Therapeutics

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 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
Guidelines for Rational Cancer Therapeutics
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2017.00310
Pubmed ID
Authors

Byunghee Yoo, Ann-Marie Billig, Zdravka Medarova

Abstract

Traditionally, cancer therapy has relied on surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy. In recent years, these interventions have become increasingly replaced or complemented by more targeted approaches that are informed by a deeper understanding of the underlying biology. Still, the implementation of fully rational patient-specific drug design appears to be years away. Here, we present a vision of rational drug design for cancer that is defined by two major components: modularity and image guidance. We suggest that modularity can be achieved by combining a nanocarrier and an oligonucleotide component into the therapeutic. Image guidance can be incorporated into the nanocarrier component by labeling with a specific imaging reporter, such as a radionuclide or contrast agent for magnetic resonance imaging. While limited by the need for additional technological advancement in the areas of cancer biology, nanotechnology, and imaging, this vision for the future of cancer therapy can be used as a guide to future research endeavors.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 20%
Other 1 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 10%
Student > Master 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Unknown 2 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 30%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 10%
Unknown 2 20%
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 10 November 2021.
All research outputs
#8,678,263
of 26,414,132 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#3,314
of 23,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,969
of 450,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#25
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,414,132 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,127 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 450,048 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 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 68% of its contemporaries.