| Title |
Post-transcriptional regulation of long noncoding RNAs in cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-3106-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xuefei Shi, Ming Sun, Ying Wu, Yanwen Yao, Hongbing Liu, Guannan Wu, Dongmei Yuan, Yong Song |
| Abstract |
It is a great surprise that the genomes of mammals and other eukaryotes harbor many thousands of long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs). Although these long noncoding transcripts were once considered to be simply transcriptional noise or cloning artifacts, multiple studies have suggested that lncRNAs are emerging as new players in diverse human diseases, especially in cancer, and that the molecular mechanisms of lncRNAs need to be elucidated. More recently, evidence has begun to accumulate describing the complex post-transcriptional regulation in which lncRNAs are involved. It was reported that lncRNAs can be implicated in degradation, translation, pre-messenger RNA (mRNA) splicing, and protein activities and even as microRNAs (miRNAs) sponges in both a sequence-dependent and sequence-independent manner. In this review, we present an updated vision of lncRNAs and summarize the mechanism of post-transcriptional regulation by lncRNAs, providing new insight into the functional cellular roles that they may play in human diseases, with a particular focus on cancers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
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 28 January 2015.
All research outputs
#18,390,814
of 22,780,165 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,370
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,277
of 352,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#82
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,165 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 352,182 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.