↓ Skip to main content

Nuclear Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 As a Biomarker in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Xenograft Tumors: Effect of Targeted Therapy and Comparison With Chemotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in endocrinology, March 2018
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 (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nuclear Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein-3 As a Biomarker in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Xenograft Tumors: Effect of Targeted Therapy and Comparison With Chemotherapy
Published in
Frontiers in endocrinology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fendo.2018.00120
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sohel M. Julovi, Janet L. Martin, Robert C. Baxter

Abstract

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) typically has a worse outcome than other breast cancer subtypes, in part owing to a lack of approved therapeutic targets or prognostic markers. We have previously described an oncogenic pathway in basal-like TNBC cells, initiated by insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3), in which the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is transactivated by sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) resulting from sphingosine kinase (SphK)-1 activation. Oncogenic IGFBP-3 signaling can be targeted by combination treatment with the S1P receptor modulator and SphK inhibitor, fingolimod, and the EGFR kinase inhibitor, gefitinib (F + G). However, the interaction of this treatment with chemotherapy has not been documented. Since we observed nuclear localization of IGFBP-3 in some TNBC tumors, this study aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of nuclear IGFBP-3 in pre-clinical models of basal-like TNBC treated with F + G and doxorubicin. Orthotopic xenograft tumors were grown in nude mice from the human basal-like TNBC cell lines MDA-MB-468 and HCC1806, and were treated with gefitinib, 25 mg/Kg, plus fingolimod, 5 mg/Kg, 3-times weekly. In some studies, doxorubicin was also administered once weekly for 6 weeks. Tumor tissue proteins were quantitated by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Interaction between doxorubicin and F + G was also studied in proliferation assays in vitro. In both tumor models, tissue staining for IGFBP-3 was predominantly nuclear. Combination of F + G significantly enhanced mouse survival, decreased nuclear IGFBP-3 and Ki67 staining, and increased apoptosis (cleaved caspase-3) staining. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that a high tumor IGFBP-3 IHC score (>median), like a high Ki67 score, was significantly associated with shorter survival time, whereas a high apoptosis score was associated with prolonged survival. Studied in vitro in both cell lines, low-dose doxorubicin that had little effect alone, strongly enhanced the cytostatic effect of low-dose F + G combination. However, in both in vivo models, doxorubicin at maximum-tolerated dose neither inhibited tumor growth when administered alone, nor enhanced the significant inhibitory effect of F + G. We conclude that doxorubicin may not add benefit to the inhibitory effect of F + G unless its dose-limiting toxicity can be overcome. Nuclear IGFBP-3 appears to have potential as a prognostic marker in TNBC and could be evaluated for clinical utility.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Researcher 3 10%
Professor 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 12 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Engineering 2 6%
Chemistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 17 55%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 07 February 2024.
All research outputs
#3,457,976
of 26,415,999 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in endocrinology
#1,043
of 13,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,601
of 351,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in endocrinology
#26
of 198 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,415,999 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 351,486 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 198 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.