The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Involvement of NADPH Oxidase 1 in Liver Kinase B1-Mediated Effects on Tumor Angiogenesis and Growth
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2018.00195 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elisabetta Zulato, Francesco Ciccarese, Giorgia Nardo, Marica Pinazza, Valentina Agnusdei, Micol Silic-Benussi, Vincenzo Ciminale, Stefano Indraccolo |
| Abstract |
The liver kinase B1 (LKB1) gene is a tumor suppressor with an established role in the control of cell metabolism and oxidative stress. However, whether dis-regulated oxidative stress promotes growth of LKB1-deficient tumors remains substantially unknown. Through in vitro studies, we observed that loss of LKB1 perturbed expression of several genes involved in reactive oxygen species (ROS) homeostasis. In particular, this analysis evidenced strongly up-modulated NADPH oxidase 1 (NOX1) transcript levels in tumor cells lacking LKB1. NOX1 accounted in part for enhanced cytotoxic effects of H2O2-induced oxidative stress in A549 LKB1-deficient tumor cells. Notably, genetic and pharmacologic inhibition of NOX1 activity reduced angiogenesis and growth of A549 tumors in mice. These results suggest that NOX1 inhibitors could counteract ROS production and the angiogenic switch in LKB1-deficient tumors. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 29% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 12% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 12% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 January 2020.
All research outputs
#15,745,807
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#4,970
of 22,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,494
of 342,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#68
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,428 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 342,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 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 52% of its contemporaries.