↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Altered status of programmed death-ligand 1 after recurrence in resected lung adenocarcinoma patients

Overview of attention for article published in OncoTargets and therapy, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
Altered status of programmed death-ligand 1 after recurrence in resected lung adenocarcinoma patients
Published in
OncoTargets and therapy, April 2017
DOI 10.2147/ott.s127498
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Chen, Hui Li, Ronglin Pang, Jia Huang

Abstract

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) is found to be overexpressed in non-small cell lung cancer. The present study intended to evaluate the status of PD-L1 expression in patients with resection and recurrent lung adenocarcinoma. Matched resection and recurrent tumor samples were harvested from 65 lung adenocarcinoma patients. Immunohistochemistry was used to evaluate the status of PD-L1 expression. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. A total of 65 patients of lung adenocarcinoma were enrolled. They underwent complete resection and had recurrence after adjuvant treatment. PD-L1 expression was identified in 43.1% (28/65) of resection samples vs 55.4% (36/65) of recurrent samples. Ten patients shifted from negative to positive, whereas another two samples showed the opposite. Patients with PD-L1 expression showed worse disease-free survival than the PD-L1-negative counterparts. The expression of PD-L1 in recurrent samples was a significant favorable factor for epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) (11.2 vs 8.2 months, P=0.030). The status of PD-L1 expression may alter between resection and recurrent samples. Also, the status of PD-L1 expression after recurrence is a better prognostic factor for EGFR-TKIs.

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.
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 %
Student > Postgraduate 2 20%
Student > Master 2 20%
Librarian 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Unspecified 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 10%
Social Sciences 1 10%
Unspecified 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 April 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#2,078
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,218
of 323,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#67
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 323,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.