You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
CDK4 expression in chordoma: A potential therapeutic target
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Orthopaedic Research, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1002/jor.23819 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tang Liu, Jacson K. Shen, Edwin Choy, Yu Zhang, Henry J. Mankin, Francis J. Hornicek, Zhenfeng Duan |
| Abstract |
Chordomas are rare bone tumors and treatment is commonly based on a combination of surgery and radiotherapy. There is no standard chemotherapy for treatment for chordoma. The aim of this study was to determine the expression of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) in chordoma and its therapeutic implications. We evaluated CDK4 expression both in chordoma cell lines and in chordoma tissues. Also, we investigated the functional roles of CDK4 in chordoma cell growth and proliferation. Furthermore, the therapeutic implications of targeting CDK4 in chordoma were evaluated. We found CDK4 highly expressed in chordoma cell lines and in a majority (97.7%) of chordoma tissues. Higher CDK4 expression correlated with metastasis and recurrence of chordoma. Treatment of chordoma cells using CDK4 inhibitor palbociclib could efficiently inhibit chordoma cells growth and proliferation. These data demonstrate that targeting CDK4 may be useful as a novel strategy in the treatment of chordoma. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 33% |
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 49% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 18 | 51% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 24 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,267,105
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Research
#908
of 3,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,181
of 447,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Research
#20
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,625 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
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 447,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.