| Title |
BET bromodomain proteins and epigenetic regulation of inflammation: implications for type 2 diabetes and breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00018-016-2320-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dequina A. Nicholas, Guillaume Andrieu, Katherine J. Strissel, Barbara S. Nikolajczyk, Gerald V. Denis |
| Abstract |
Chronic inflammation drives pathologies associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and breast cancer. Obesity-driven inflammation may explain increased risk and mortality of breast cancer with T2D reported in the epidemiology literature. Therapeutic approaches to target inflammation in both T2D and cancer have so far fallen short of the expected improvements in disease pathogenesis or outcomes. The targeting of epigenetic regulators of cytokine transcription and cytokine signaling offers one promising, untapped approach to treating diseases driven by inflammation. Recent work has deeply implicated the Bromodomain and Extra-Terminal domain (BET) proteins, which are acetylated histone "readers", in epigenetic regulation of inflammation. This review focuses on inflammation associated with T2D and breast cancer, and the possibility of targeting BET proteins as an approach to regulating inflammation in the clinic. Understanding inflammation in the context of BET protein regulation may provide a basis for designing promising therapeutics for T2D and breast cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 15% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 19 | 36% |
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 14 August 2016.
All research outputs
#14,873,797
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#2,871
of 4,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,347
of 371,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#30
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. 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 371,247 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.