↓ Skip to main content

Exploring Internal Ribosome Entry Sites as Therapeutic Targets

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Exploring Internal Ribosome Entry Sites as Therapeutic Targets
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2015.00233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anton A. Komar, Maria Hatzoglou

Abstract

Initiation of eukaryotic mRNA translation may proceed via several different routes, each requiring a different subset of factors and relying on different and specific interactions between the mRNA and the ribosome. Two modes predominate: (i) so-called cap-dependent initiation, which requires all canonical initiation factors and is responsible for about 95-97% of all initiation events in eukaryotic cells; and (ii) cap-independent internal initiation, which requires a reduced subset of initiation factors and accounts for up to 5% of the remaining initiation events. Internal initiation relies on the presence of so-called internal ribosome entry site (IRES) elements in the 5' UTRs of some viral and cellular mRNAs. These elements (often possessing complex secondary and tertiary structures) promote efficient interaction of the mRNA with the 40S ribosome and allow for internal ribosome entry. Internal initiation of translation of specific mRNAs may contribute to development of severe disease and pathological states, such as hepatitis C and cancer. Therefore, this cellular mechanism represents an attractive target for pharmacological modulation. The purpose of this review is to provide insight into current strategies used to target viral and cellular IRESs and discuss the physiological consequences (and potential therapeutic implications) of abrogation/modulation of IRES-mediated translation.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 1%
Unknown 89 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 22%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 4%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 17 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 28%
Chemistry 4 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 18 20%
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 17 June 2016.
All research outputs
#7,959,162
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#2,901
of 22,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,104
of 294,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#12
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 22,414 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 294,423 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.