↓ Skip to main content

The growth rate of “clinically significant” renal cancer

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
1 X user
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
The growth rate of “clinically significant” renal cancer
Published in
SpringerPlus, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40064-015-1385-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ofer N. Gofrit, Vladimir Yutkin, Kevin C. Zorn, Mordechai Duvdevani, Ezekiel H. Landau, Guy Hidas, Dov Pode

Abstract

Surveillance studies of enhancing renal masses report on a mean tumor growth rate of about 0.3 cm/year. In most of these studies however, only small tumors in elderly patients were followed. In the current report, we attempt to evaluate the growth rate of "clinically significant" renal carcinomas defined as tumors that were treated immediately upon diagnosis. 46 patients (mean age 64 years SD 11 years) were treated for renal carcinoma. All had a cross-sectional imaging studies performed 6-60 months prior to diagnosis of kidney cancer demonstrating no tumor. Tumor growth rate was calculated by dividing tumor's largest diameter by the time interval between the normal kidney imaging and diagnosis of renal cancer. Mean tumor diameter was 4.5 cm (SD 2.4 cm). Mean time period from the normal imaging to diagnosis of renal cancer was 33.6 months (SD 18 months). According to the proposed model, the average growth rate of "clinically significant" renal carcinomas was 2.13 cm/year (SD 1.45, range 0.2-6.5 cm/year). Tumor growth rate correlated inversely with patient's age (p = 0.007). Patient gender or Fuhrman's grade did not correlate however. The growth rate of "clinically significant" renal cancer appears to be higher than the rate reported in surveillance trials. Renal tumors tend to grow faster in young patients. As such, variable growth rate should be taken into account when considering active surveillance in young patients and when designing trials for evaluation of anti-cancer agents.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 33%
Researcher 2 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 11%
Unknown 4 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 17 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,243,424
of 24,284,650 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#56
of 1,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,470
of 282,686 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#9
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,284,650 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,858 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 282,686 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 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 93% of its contemporaries.