↓ Skip to main content

Targeting ATM-deficient CLL through interference with DNA repair pathways

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Targeting ATM-deficient CLL through interference with DNA repair pathways
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2015.00207
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gero Knittel, Paul Liedgens, Hans C. Reinhardt

Abstract

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common form of leukemia in the Western world and accounts for approximately 30% of adult leukemias and 25% of non-Hodgkin lymphomas. The median age at diagnosis is 72 years. During recent years numerous genetic aberrations have been identified that are associated with an aggressive course of the disease and resistance against genotoxic chemotherapies. The DNA damage-responsive proapoptotic ATM-CHK2-p53 signaling pathway is frequently mutationally inactivated in CLL either through large deletions on chromosome 11q (ATM) or 17p (TP53), or through protein-damaging mutations. Here, we focus on the role of ATM signaling for the immediate DNA damage response, DNA repair and leukemogenesis. We further discuss novel therapeutic concepts for the targeted treatment of ATM-defective CLLs. We specifically highlight the potential use of PARP1 and DNA-PKcs inhibitors for the treatment of ATM-mutant CLL clones. Lastly, we briefly discuss the current state of genetically engineered mouse models of the disease and emphasize the use of these preclinical tools as a common platform for the development and validation of novel therapeutic agents.

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 profiles of 2 X users 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 26%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Master 7 12%
Researcher 5 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 18%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 10 18%
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 27 June 2015.
All research outputs
#18,411,569
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#7,035
of 11,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,403
of 266,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#73
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,762 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 266,655 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.