↓ Skip to main content

Mesenchymal–epithelial transition (MET) as a mechanism for metastatic colonisation in breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
285 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
312 Mendeley
Title
Mesenchymal–epithelial transition (MET) as a mechanism for metastatic colonisation in breast cancer
Published in
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, June 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10555-012-9377-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. P. A. Devika Gunasinghe, Alan Wells, Erik W. Thompson, Honor J. Hugo

Abstract

As yet, there is no cure for metastatic breast cancer. Historically, considerable research effort has been concentrated on understanding the processes of metastasis, how a primary tumour locally invades and systemically disseminates using the phenotypic switching mechanism of epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT); however, much less is understood about how metastases are then formed. Breast cancer metastases often look (and may even function) as 'normal' breast tissue, a bizarre observation against the backdrop of the organ structure of the lung, liver, bone or brain. Mesenchymal to epithelial transition (MET), the opposite of EMT, has been proposed as a mechanism for establishment of the metastatic neoplasm, leading to questions such as: Can MET be clearly demonstrated in vivo? What factors cause this phenotypic switch within the cancer cell? Are these signals/factors derived from the metastatic site (soil) or expressed by the cancer cells themselves (seed)? How do the cancer cells then grow into a detectable secondary tumour and further disseminate? And finally--Can we design and develop therapies that may combat this dissemination switch? This review aims to address these important questions by evaluating long-standing paradigms and novel emerging concepts in the field of epithelial mesencyhmal plasticity.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 312 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 300 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 83 27%
Student > Master 44 14%
Researcher 36 12%
Student > Bachelor 36 12%
Student > Postgraduate 17 5%
Other 38 12%
Unknown 58 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 78 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 60 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 49 16%
Engineering 17 5%
Chemistry 5 2%
Other 34 11%
Unknown 69 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 November 2012.
All research outputs
#20,174,175
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#736
of 806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,224
of 164,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer and Metastasis Reviews
#18
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 164,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.