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.
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.
| Title |
Age distribution and age-related outcomes of olfactory neuroblastoma: a population-based analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Management and Research, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cmar.s151945 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhenzhen Yin, Youyou Wang, Yuemei Wu, Ximei Zhang, Fengming Wang, Peiguo Wang, Zhen Tao, Zhiyong Yuan |
| Abstract |
The objective of the study was to describe the age distribution and to evaluate the role of prognostic value of age on survival in patients diagnosed with olfactory neuroblastoma (ONB). A population-based retrospective analysis was conducted. The population-based study of patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) tumor registry, who were diagnosed with ONB from 1973 to 2014, were retrospectively analyzed. The cohort included 876 patients with a median age of 54 years. There was a unimodal distribution of age and ONBs most frequently occurred in the fifth to sixth decades of life. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates of 69% and 78% at 5 years. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that age, SEER stage, and surgery were independent prognostic factors for CSS. The risk of overall death and cancer-specific death increased 3.1% and 1.6% per year, respectively. Patients aged >60 years presented significantly poor OS and CSS compared with patients aged ≤60 years, even in patients with loco-regional disease or in those treated with surgery. This study highlights the growing evidence that there is a unimodal age distribution of ONB and that age is an important adverse prognostic factor. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 67% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
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 11 June 2018.
All research outputs
#20,705,128
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Management and Research
#1,407
of 2,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,910
of 326,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Management and Research
#48
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 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 2,021 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. 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 326,858 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 61 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.