↓ Skip to main content

Single-Cell Phenotypic Characterization of Human Pituitary GHomas and Non-Functioning Adenomas Based on Hormone Content and Calcium Responses to Hypothalamic Releasing Hormones

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Single-Cell Phenotypic Characterization of Human Pituitary GHomas and Non-Functioning Adenomas Based on Hormone Content and Calcium Responses to Hypothalamic Releasing Hormones
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2015.00124
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Senovilla, Lucía Núñez, José María de Campos, Daniel A. de Luis, Enrique Romero, Javier García-Sancho, Carlos Villalobos

Abstract

Human pituitary tumors are generally benign adenomas causing considerable morbidity due to excess hormone secretion, hypopituitarism, and other tumor mass effects. Pituitary tumors are highly heterogeneous and difficult to type, often containing mixed cell phenotypes. We have used calcium imaging followed by multiple immunocytochemistry to type growth hormone secreting (GHomas) and non-functioning pituitary adenomas (NFPAs). Individual cells were typed for stored hormones and calcium responses to classic hypothalamic releasing hormones (HRHs). We found that GHomas contained growth hormone cells either lacking responses to HRHs or responding to all four HRHs. However, most GHoma cells were polyhormonal cells responsive to both thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) and GH-releasing hormone. NFPAs were also highly heterogeneous. Some of them contained ACTH cells lacking responses to HRHs or polyhormonal gonadotropes responsive to LHRH and TRH. However, most NFPAs were made of cells storing no hormone and responded only to TRH. These results may provide new insights on the ontogeny of GHomas and NFPAs.

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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Researcher 3 15%
Other 2 10%
Professor 2 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 10%
Other 5 25%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 May 2015.
All research outputs
#21,110,894
of 25,932,719 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,578
of 22,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,944
of 281,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#55
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,932,719 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,839 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 281,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.