↓ Skip to main content

Overexpression of dishevelled 2 is involved in tumor metastasis and is associated with poor prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Oncology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Overexpression of dishevelled 2 is involved in tumor metastasis and is associated with poor prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma
Published in
Clinical and Translational Oncology, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12094-017-1697-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Zhang, C. Li, X. Chen, Y. Zhou, B. Yin, R. Ni, Y. Zhang, J. Liu

Abstract

Although hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignant tumors, its molecular mechanism is still unknown. Dishevelled 2 (Dvl2) is one of the downstream targets of non-canonical Wnt signaling, which has been demonstrated to be of great importance in the progression of cancers. Nevertheless, the expression mechanisms and physiological significance of Dvl2 in HCC remain unclear. Western blotting and immunohistochemistry were used to measure Dvl2 protein expression in HCC and adjacent normal tissues of 101 patients. Wound healing and transwell assays were used to determine cell migration and invasion. Dvl2 expression was upregulated in HCC tissues compared to the adjacent normal tissues. Moreover, its expression level was significantly correlated with histological grade (P = 0.042), metastasis (P = 0.005) and vein invasion (P = 0.009) in patients with HCC. Wound healing and transwell assays showed that knockdown of Dvl2 reduced cell migration and invasion in HepG2 cells. Finally, we confirmed that Dvl2 could regulate the migration and invasion of HCC cells by interacting with P62 in non-canonical Wnt signaling. Our data showed that Dvl2 was overexpressed in HCC tissues and was also correlated with poor prognosis, suggesting that Dvl2 is a novel therapeutic target for HCC.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 22%
Unknown 5 56%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 22%
Neuroscience 2 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Unknown 4 44%
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 08 June 2017.
All research outputs
#19,011,832
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#884
of 1,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,159
of 318,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Oncology
#17
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 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 1,366 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 318,206 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 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.