↓ Skip to main content

Before or After: Evolving Neoadjuvant Approaches to Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2018
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 (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Before or After: Evolving Neoadjuvant Approaches to Locally Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2018.00005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Lewis, Erin A. Gillaspie, Evan C. Osmundson, Leora Horn

Abstract

The treatment of patients with stage IIIA (N2) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is one of the most challenging and controversial areas of thoracic oncology. This heterogeneous group is characterized by varying tumor size and location, the potential for involvement of surrounding structures, and ipsilateral mediastinal lymph node spread. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, administered prior to definitive local therapy, has been found to improve survival in patients with stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC. Concurrent chemoradiation has also been evaluated in phase III studies in efforts to improve control of locoregional disease. In certain instances, a tri-modality approach involving concurrent chemoradiation followed by surgery, may offer patients the best chance for cure. In this article, we provide an overview of the trials evaluating neoadjuvant therapy in patients with stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC that have resulted in current practice strategies, and we highlight the areas of uncertainty in the management of this challenging disease. We also review the current ongoing research and future directions in the management of stage IIIA (N2) NSCLC.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 15%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Chemistry 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 21 44%
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 12 April 2018.
All research outputs
#15,745,807
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#4,970
of 22,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,461
of 450,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#34
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,428 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 450,227 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 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 53% of its contemporaries.