↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Circulating thymus and activation-regulated chemokine/CC chemokine ligand 17 is a strong candidate diagnostic marker for interstitial lung disease in patients with malignant tumors: a result from a…

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
Title
Circulating thymus and activation-regulated chemokine/CC chemokine ligand 17 is a strong candidate diagnostic marker for interstitial lung disease in patients with malignant tumors: a result from a pilot study
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s82995
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiromichi Yamane, Nobuaki Ochi, Tomoko Yamagishi, Yoshihiro Honda, Masami Takeyama, Nagio Takigawa

Abstract

Serum Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) level is an established diagnostic marker of interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, it is also elevated in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The significance of circulating thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC)/CC chemokine ligand 17 (CCL17) in malignant diseases remains unknown. We measured circulating TARC/CCL17 and KL-6 using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and electrochemiluminescence immunoassay, respectively, in 26 patients with malignant disease and six patients with benign lung disease (BLD). The cutoff levels were 500 U/mL for KL-6 and 450 pg/mL for TARC/CCL17. The significance of the markers was evaluated in relationship to the presence of ILD (n=10). The statistical significance was set at P<0.05. The KL-6 positive ratio was significantly higher in the patients with NSCLC (n=17) than in those with BLD. There was a significant difference in the KL-6 positive ratio between the patients with NSCLC without ILD and those with BLD without ILD. However, there were no significant differences in the TARC/CCL17 positive ratio between the patients with NSCLC and BLD or between those with NSCLC without ILD and those with BLD without ILD. The TARC/CCL17 positive ratio was significantly higher in the patients with malignancy and ILD than in those without ILD. There was also a significant difference in the TARC/CCL17 positive ratio between the patients with NSCLC without ILD and those with ILD. TARC/CCL17 may be useful for the diagnosis of ILD in patients with malignancies. Confirmation of the results is warranted through a large-scale study.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 29%
Professor 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 57%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 14%
Unknown 1 14%

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 01 July 2015.
All research outputs
#7,834,176
of 12,485,238 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#641
of 922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,802
of 234,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#32
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,485,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 922 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 234,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.