| Title |
The functional sites of miRNAs and lncRNAs in gastric carcinogenesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-3136-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiangxiang Wan, Xiaoyun Ding, Shengcan Chen, Haojun Song, Haizhong Jiang, Ying Fang, Peifei Li, Junming Guo |
| Abstract |
Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignant diseases and has one of the highest mortality rates worldwide. Its molecular mechanisms are poorly understood. Recently, the functions of non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) in gastric cancer have attracted wide attention. Although the expression levels of various ncRNAs are different, they may work together in a network and contribute to gastric carcinogenesis by altering the expression of oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes. They affect the cell cycle, apoptosis, motility, invasion, and metastasis. Dysregulated microRNAs (miRNAs) and long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), including miR-21, miR-106, H19, and ANRIL, directly or indirectly regulate carcinogenic factors or signaling pathways such as PTEN, CDK, caspase, E-cadherin, Akt, and P53. Greater recognition of the roles of miRNAs and lncRNAs in gastric carcinogenesis can provide new insight into the mechanisms of tumor development and identify targets for anticancer drug development. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 29% |
| Researcher | 7 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 32% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 26% |
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 01 February 2015.
All research outputs
#20,254,575
of 22,783,848 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,834
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#296,534
of 352,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#104
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,783,848 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 2,622 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. 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 352,508 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 164 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.