BackgroundBibliometric and Altmetric analyses highlight key publications, which have been considered to be the most influential in their field. The hypothesis was that highly cited articles would correlate positively with levels of evidence and Altmetric scores (AS) and rank.MethodsSurgery as a search term was entered into Thomson Reuter’s Web of Science database to identify all English-language full articles. The 100 most cited articles were analysed by topic, journal, author, year, institution, and AS.ResultsBy bibliometric criteria, eligible articles numbered 286,122 and the median (range) citation number was 574 (446–5746). The most cited article (Dindo et al.) classified surgical complications by severity score (5746 citations). Annals of Surgery published most articles and received most citations (26,457). The country and year with most publications were the USA (n = 50) and 1999 (n = 11). By Altmetric criteria, the article with the highest AS was by Bigelow et al. (AS = 53, hypothermia’s role in cardiac surgery); Annals of Surgery published most articles, and the country and year with most publications were USA (n = 4) and 2007 (n = 3). Level-1-evidence articles numbered 13, but no correlation was found between evidence level and citation number (SCC 0.094, p = 0.352) or AS (SCC = 0.149, p = 0.244). Median AS was 0 (0–53), and in articles published after the year 2000, AS was associated with citation number (r = 0.461, p = 0.001) and citation rate index (r = 0.455, p = 0.002). AS was not associated with journal impact factor (r = 0.160, p = 0.118).ConclusionBibliometric and Altmetric analyses provide important but different perspectives regarding article impact, which are unrelated to evidence level.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00268-018-4579-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background
The molecular profile of early-onset colonic cancer is undefined. This study evaluated clinicopathological features and oncological outcomes of young patients with colonic cancer according to microsatellite status.
Methods
Anonymized data from an international collaboration were analysed. Criteria for inclusion were patients younger than 50 years diagnosed with stage I–III colonic cancer that was surgically resected. Clinicopathological features, microsatellite status, and disease-specific outcomes were evaluated.
Results
A total of 650 patients fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. Microsatellite instability (MSI) was identified in 170 (26.2 per cent), whereas 480 had microsatellite-stable (MSS) tumours (relative risk of MSI 2.5 compared with older patients). MSI was associated with a family history of colorectal cancer and lesions in the proximal colon. The proportions with pathological node-positive disease (45.9 versus 45.6 per cent; P = 1.000) and tumour budding (20.3 versus 20.5 per cent; P = 1.000) were similar in the two groups. Patients with MSI tumours were more likely to have BRAF (22.5 versus 6.9 per cent; P < 0.001) and KRAS (40.0 versus 24.2 per cent; P = 0.006) mutations, and a hereditary cancer syndrome (30.0 versus 5.0 per cent; P < 0.001; relative risk 6). Five-year disease-free survival rates in the MSI group were 95.0, 92.0, and 80.0 per cent for patients with stage I, II, and III tumours, compared with 88.0, 88.0, and 65.0 per cent in the MSS group (P = 0.753, P = 0.487, and P = 0.105 respectively).
Conclusion
Patients with early-onset colonic cancer have a high risk of MSI and defined genetic conditions. Those with MSI tumours have more adverse pathology (budding, KRAS/BRAF mutations, and nodal metastases) than older patients with MSI cancers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.