↓ Skip to main content

Anti-idiotype antibodies in cancer treatment: the pharmaceutical industry perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Anti-idiotype antibodies in cancer treatment: the pharmaceutical industry perspective
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2012.00147
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberto E. Gómez, Maria L. Ardigo

Abstract

Active immunotherapy is an interesting field from the industry's perspective and in the last years, regulatory agencies and the medical community have showed renewed expectations and interest in cancer vaccines. The development of new immune therapies offers many challenges, and this is reflected in the small number of phase III trials showing clear benefits. Traditional concepts applied in clinical trials for the development of chemotherapeutic agents may be inadequate for immunotherapies and a new paradigm is emerging. It is possible that organized efforts and funding will accelerate the development of therapeutically effective cancer vaccines. This article reviews the attributes of cancer vaccines which make them attractive from the industry's perspective, and focuses especially in the characteristics of Racotumomab, an anti-idiotype antibody vaccine.

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 profiles of 3 X users 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 5%
Unknown 21 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 27%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Other 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 4 18%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 18%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 4 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 December 2012.
All research outputs
#14,913,921
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#4,134
of 22,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,575
of 250,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#46
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,414 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. 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 250,087 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 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 70% of its contemporaries.