↓ Skip to main content

Circulating Tumor Cells in Genitourinary Malignancies: An Evolving Path to Precision Medicine

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2017
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 (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Circulating Tumor Cells in Genitourinary Malignancies: An Evolving Path to Precision Medicine
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2017.00006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cory M. Hugen, Daniel E. Zainfeld, Amir Goldkorn

Abstract

Precision medicine with molecularly directed therapeutics is rapidly expanding in all subspecialties of oncology. Molecular analysis and treatment monitoring require tumor tissue, but resections or biopsies are not always feasible due to tumor location, patient safety, and cost. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) offer a safe, low-cost, and repeatable tissue source as an alternative to invasive biopsies. "Liquid biopsies" can be collected from a peripheral blood draw and analyzed to isolate, enumerate, and molecularly characterize CTCs. While there is deserved excitement surrounding new CTC technologies, studies are ongoing to determine whether these cells can provide reliable and accurate information about molecular drivers of cancer progression and inform treatment decisions. This review focuses on the current status of CTCs in genitourinary (GU) cancer. We will review currently used methodologies to isolate and detect CTCs, their use as predictive biomarkers, and highlight emerging research and applications of CTC analysis in GU malignancies.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Computer Science 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 11 26%
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 17 February 2017.
All research outputs
#16,722,913
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#6,612
of 22,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,649
of 422,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#17
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 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 22,420 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 422,653 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 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 52% of its contemporaries.