↓ Skip to main content

Integrating the multiple dimensions of genomic and epigenomic landscapes of cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
Title
Integrating the multiple dimensions of genomic and epigenomic landscapes of cancer
Published in
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, January 2010
DOI 10.1007/s10555-010-9199-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raj Chari, Kelsie L. Thu, Ian M. Wilson, William W. Lockwood, Kim M. Lonergan, Bradley P. Coe, Chad A. Malloff, Adi F. Gazdar, Stephen Lam, Cathie Garnis, Calum E. MacAulay, Carlos E. Alvarez, Wan L. Lam

Abstract

Advances in high-throughput, genome-wide profiling technologies have allowed for an unprecedented view of the cancer genome landscape. Specifically, high-density microarrays and sequencing-based strategies have been widely utilized to identify genetic (such as gene dosage, allelic status, and mutations in gene sequence) and epigenetic (such as DNA methylation, histone modification, and microRNA) aberrations in cancer. Although the application of these profiling technologies in unidimensional analyses has been instrumental in cancer gene discovery, genes affected by low-frequency events are often overlooked. The integrative approach of analyzing parallel dimensions has enabled the identification of (a) genes that are often disrupted by multiple mechanisms but at low frequencies by any one mechanism and (b) pathways that are often disrupted at multiple components but at low frequencies at individual components. These benefits of using an integrative approach illustrate the concept that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. As efforts have now turned toward parallel and integrative multidimensional approaches for studying the cancer genome landscape in hopes of obtaining a more insightful understanding of the key genes and pathways driving cancer cells, this review describes key findings disseminating from such high-throughput, integrative analyses, including contributions to our understanding of causative genetic events in cancer cell biology.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
Canada 2 3%
Germany 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Hungary 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Luxembourg 1 1%
Unknown 65 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Other 9 12%
Student > Master 9 12%
Professor 4 5%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 45%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 12%
Computer Science 4 5%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 6 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 August 2020.
All research outputs
#7,419,285
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#286
of 806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,843
of 165,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 165,194 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.