| Title |
Germline mutations in pancreatic cancer and potential new therapeutic options
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Oncotarget, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.18632/oncotarget.17291 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rille Pihlak, Juan W. Valle, Mairéad G. McNamara |
| Abstract |
Due to short-lived treatment responses in unresectable disease, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) continues to be one of the deadliest cancers. There is availability of new information about germline and sporadic mutations in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) damage repair pathway in PDAC in recent decades and the expectation is that novel targeted therapies will thus be developed. A variety of germline mutations (BRCA2, BRCA1, PALB2, CDKN2A, ATM, TP53 and mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6) have been reported in these patients with the highest prevalence being BRCA1/2. Positive results have been reported with the use of targeted therapies, particularly poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in BRCA-mutated ovarian and breast cancers, and their use is currently being investigated in germline-mutated pancreatic cancer. The aim of this review is to provide an outline of germline DNA damage repair mutations in pancreatic cancer and their effect on the incidence, outcomes and responses to different therapeutic options. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 11% |
| Mexico | 2 | 7% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 14 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 19 | 68% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 21% |
| Scientists | 2 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 96 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 25 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Unknown | 29 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 22 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,972,093
of 24,643,522 outputs
Outputs from Oncotarget
#876
of 14,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,294
of 314,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oncotarget
#44
of 1,408 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,643,522 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,200 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 314,807 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,408 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.