| Title |
Novel agents for the treatment of childhood leukemia: an update
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s126368 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ertugrul Eryılmaz, Cengiz Canpolat |
| Abstract |
Achieving lower morbidity and higher survival rates in the treatment of childhood leukemia has been a paradigm of success in modern oncology. However, serious long-term health complications occur in very large populations of childhood leukemia survivors, in the case of both acute lymphoid leukemia and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Additionally, 15% of acute lymphoid leukemia patients have treatment failures, and rates are even higher in childhood AML. In the last few decades, as a result of well-tested experiments that statistically analyzed treatment cohorts, new agents have emerged as alternatives or supplements to established treatments, in which high survival and/or less morbidity were observed. This review provides an overview of better practice in the treatment of childhood leukemia. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 17 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 38% |
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 09 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,438,425
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#1,145
of 2,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,681
of 327,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#37
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,967 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 51% 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 327,299 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.