| Title |
The cancer stem cell niche: cross talk between cancer stem cells and their microenvironment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-013-1561-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jun Ye, Dang Wu, Pin Wu, Zhigang Chen, Jian Huang |
| Abstract |
Despite recent progresses in tumor therapy and increased knowledge in tumor biology, tumor remains a common and lethal disease worldwide. Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are a subset of cancer cells with a stem cell-like ability, which may drive tumor growth and recurrence and are resistant to many current anticancer treatments. Solid tumors are regarded as "organs" which are comprised of cancer cells and the tumor stroma. The tumor microenvironment makes up the stroma of the tumor, which occupies the majority of the tumor mass, including the extracellular matrix (ECM), mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), endothelial cells, immune cells, and, what is more, networks of cytokines and growth factors. The microenvironment or niche surrounding CSCs largely governs their cellular fate. Recent work has revealed that the microenvironment supports CSC self-renewal and simultaneously serves as a physical barrier to drug delivery. The tumor microenvironment plays pivotal roles in each stage of tumor development. Knowledge about the interactions of CSCs with their microenvironment would seem to be of most importance for developing new treatment strategies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Denmark | 2 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 209 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 40 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 18% |
| Researcher | 27 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 11% |
| Unknown | 52 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 51 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 33 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 13% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 11 | 5% |
| Engineering | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 10% |
| Unknown | 61 | 28% |
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 18 January 2014.
All research outputs
#18,360,179
of 22,739,983 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,370
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,876
of 306,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#40
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,739,983 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,622 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 306,547 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.