↓ Skip to main content

Biological Rationale for the Use of PPARγ Agonists in Glioblastoma

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Biological Rationale for the Use of PPARγ Agonists in Glioblastoma
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, March 2014
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2014.00052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hayley Patricia Ellis, Kathreena Mary Kurian

Abstract

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common primary intrinsic central nervous system tumor and has an extremely poor overall survival with only 10% patients being alive after 5 years. There has been interesting preliminary evidence suggesting that diabetic patients receiving peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) agonists, a group of anti-diabetic, thiazolidinedione drugs, have an increased median survival for glioblastoma. Although thiazolidinediones are effective oral medications for type 2 diabetes, certain agonists carry the risk for congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, cardiovascular disease, bone loss, weight gain, and fluid retention as side-effects. The nuclear receptor transcription factor PPARγ has been found to be expressed in high grade gliomas, and its activation has been shown to have several antineoplastic effects on human and rat glioma cell lines, and in some instances an additional protective increase in antioxidant enzymes has been observed in normal astrocytes. At present, no clinical trials are underway with regards to treating glioma patients using PPARγ agonists. This review presents the case for evaluating the potential of PPARγ agonists as novel adjuvants in the treatment of refractory high grade glioma.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Sweden 1 3%
Unknown 38 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Researcher 9 23%
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Other 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 4 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 15%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 7 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 14 March 2014.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,313
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,224
of 235,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#31
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. 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 235,803 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.