| Title |
The Gender of Cell Lines Matters When Screening for Novel Anti-Cancer Drugs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The AAPS Journal, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1208/s12248-014-9617-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Larissa M. Nunes, Elisa Robles-Escajeda, Yahaira Santiago-Vazquez, Nora M. Ortega, Carolina Lema, Almendra Muro, Gladys Almodovar, Umashankar Das, Swagatika Das, Johnatan R. Dimmock, Renato J. Aguilera, Armando Varela-Ramirez |
| Abstract |
Current reports indicated that the gender origin of cells is important in all facets of experimental biology. To explore this matter using an anticancer high throughput screening platform, seven male- and seven female-derived human cell lines, six from cancer patients in each group, were exposed to 81 novel cytotoxins. In this screen, the findings revealed that 79 out of 81 of the compounds consistently inflicted higher levels of toxicity towards male derived cells, emphasizing that there is indeed a gender-related difference in cell sensitivity to these anti-neoplastic agents. This gender-related drug sensitivity and toxicity explored at the molecular and cellular level emerged from a drug discovery enterprise. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 11 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 March 2018.
All research outputs
#15,840,905
of 24,137,933 outputs
Outputs from The AAPS Journal
#905
of 1,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,826
of 230,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AAPS Journal
#17
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,137,933 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,346 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 230,890 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.