↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Optimal management of renal cell carcinoma in the elderly: a review.

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Optimal management of renal cell carcinoma in the elderly: a review.
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2013
DOI 10.2147/cia.s30765
Pubmed ID
Abstract

Both the aging population and the incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are growing, making the question of tumor management in the elderly a real challenge. Doctors should be aware of the importance of assessing this specific subpopulation. An aggressive therapeutic approach may be balanced by the benefit of the treatment - care or cure - and the life expectancy and willingness of the patient. The treatment for local disease can be surgery (radical or partial nephrectomy) or ablative therapies (radiofrequency, cryotherapy). Even if in most cases surgery is safe, complications such as alteration of renal function may occur, especially in the elderly, with physiological renal impairment at baseline. More recently, another option has been developed as an alternative: active surveillance. In the past decade, new drugs have been approved in the metastatic setting. All the phase 3 trials have included patients without a limit on age. Nevertheless, data concerning the elderly are still poor and concern only a very selective subpopulation. The toxicity profile of targeted agents may interfere with pre-existent comorbidities. Furthermore, the metabolism of several agents via cytochrome P450 can cause drug interaction. The importance of quality of life is a major factor with regard to management of therapy. Finally, to date, there is no recommendation of systematic a priori dose reduction in the elderly. In this review we describe the various possibilities of treatment for localized RCC or metastatic RCC in an aging population.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Denmark 1 3%
Unknown 33 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Other 6 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Librarian 2 6%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 61%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Computer Science 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Unknown 7 19%

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 May 2013.
All research outputs
#6,681,385
of 11,234,828 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#654
of 1,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,758
of 128,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#24
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,234,828 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,147 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 128,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.