↓ Skip to main content

Topoisomerase II Poisons for Glioblastoma; Existing Challenges and Opportunities to Personalize Therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Topoisomerase II Poisons for Glioblastoma; Existing Challenges and Opportunities to Personalize Therapy
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00459
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amol Mehta, Chidiebere U. Awah, Adam M. Sonabend

Abstract

Despite advances in surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, glioblastoma (GBM) remains a malignancy with poor prognosis. The molecular profile of GBM is diverse across patients, and individual responses to therapy are highly variable. Yet, patients diagnosed with GBM are treated with a rather uniform paradigm. Exploiting these molecular differences and inter-individual responses to therapy may present an opportunity to improve the otherwise bleak prognosis of patients with GBM. This review aims to examine one group of chemotherapeutics: Topoisomerase 2 (TOP2) poisons, a class of drugs that enables TOP2 to induce DNA damage, but interferes with its ability to repair it. These potent chemotherapeutic agents are currently used for a number of malignancies and have shown promise in the treatment of GBM. Despite their robust efficacy in vitro, some of these agents have fallen short of achieving similar results in clinical trials for this tumor. In this review, we explore reasons for this discrepancy, focusing on drug delivery and individual susceptibility differences as challenges for effective TOP2-targeting for GBM. We critically review the evidence implicating genes in susceptibility to TOP2 poisons and categorize this evidence as experimental, correlative or both. This is important as mere experimental evidence does not necessarily lead to identification of genes that serve as good biomarkers of susceptibility for personalizing the use of these drugs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Student > Master 5 13%
Professor 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 26%
Chemistry 6 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Engineering 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 12 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 February 2019.
All research outputs
#7,808,704
of 25,013,458 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,862
of 14,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,440
of 334,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#97
of 322 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,013,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,107 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 334,221 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 322 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.