↓ Skip to main content

Epigallocathechin gallate, polyphenol present in green tea, inhibits stem-like characteristics and epithelial-mesenchymal transition in nasopharyngeal cancer cell lines

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Epigallocathechin gallate, polyphenol present in green tea, inhibits stem-like characteristics and epithelial-mesenchymal transition in nasopharyngeal cancer cell lines
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, October 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-12-201
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chien-Hung Lin, Yao-An Shen, Peir-Haur Hung, Yuan-Bin Yu, Yann-Jang Chen

Abstract

Previous studies have demonstrated that the consumption of green tea inhibits the growth of various cancers. Most cancers are believed to be initiated from and maintained by a small population of cancer stem-like cells (CSC) or tumor-initiating cells (TIC) that are responsible for tumor relapse and chemotherapeutic resistance. Although epigallocathechin gallate (EGCG), the most abundant catechin in green tea, has been reported to induce growth inhibition and apoptosis in some cancer cells, its effect on CSC is undefined. In this study, we enriched CSC by the sphere formation, and provided an efficient model for further experiments. Using this method, we examined the effects of EGCG regulating the nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) CSC and attempted to elucidate the possible mechanisms.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 10 17%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Other 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 18 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 19 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 October 2012.
All research outputs
#13,370,975
of 22,684,168 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#1,502
of 3,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,200
of 183,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#53
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,684,168 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,619 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 183,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.