↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Current status and dilemma of second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: is there a silver lining?

Overview of attention for article published in OncoTargets and therapy, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Current status and dilemma of second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: is there a silver lining?
Published in
OncoTargets and therapy, August 2018
DOI 10.2147/ott.s166405
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jie Hua, Si Shi, Dingkong Liang, Chen Liang, Qingcai Meng, Bo Zhang, Quanxing Ni, Jin Xu, Xianjun Yu

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most lethal malignant diseases worldwide. The majority of patients present with advanced disease and, therefore, need palliative chemotherapy. Some chemotherapeutic regimens have been well established as first-line therapies and have been shown to increase survival; however, almost all patients with advanced pancreatic cancer will experience disease progression after first-line therapy. Nevertheless, many patients who retain good performance status after initial treatment remain good candidates for additional therapy. Historically, few studies have assessed second-line therapy, with most reports representing small phase II trials with variable findings; however, clinical research for second-line treatment has increased in the past decade, and several randomized controlled trials using different regimens have been published. The current literature shows varying results on treatment efficacy and tolerability. Thus, we reviewed the published data on the use of chemotherapy in the second-line setting for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 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 > Ph. D. Student 4 19%
Other 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 7 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 July 2019.
All research outputs
#14,705,603
of 25,734,859 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#730
of 3,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,728
of 342,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#28
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,734,859 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,014 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 342,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.