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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Long-range massively parallel mate pair sequencing detects distinct mutations and similar patterns of structural mutability in two breast cancer cell lines
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Genetics, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.cancergen.2011.07.009 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Oliver A Hampton, Maxim Koriabine, Christopher A Miller, Cristian Coarfa, Jian Li, Petra Den Hollander, Caroline Schoenherr, Lucia Carbone, Mikhail Nefedov, Boudewijn F H Ten Hallers, Adrian V Lee, Pieter J De Jong, Aleksandar Milosavljevic |
| Abstract |
Cancer genomes frequently undergo genomic instability resulting in accumulation of chromosomal rearrangement. To date, one of the main challenges has been to confidently and accurately identify these rearrangements by using short-read massively parallel sequencing. We were able to improve cancer rearrangement detection by combining two distinct massively parallel sequencing strategies: fosmid-sized (36 kb on average) and standard 5 kb mate pair libraries. We applied this combined strategy to map rearrangements in two breast cancer cell lines, MCF7 and HCC1954. We detected and validated a total of 91 somatic rearrangements in MCF7 and 25 in HCC1954, including genomic alterations corresponding to previously reported transcript aberrations in these two cell lines. Each of the genomes contains two types of breakpoints: clustered and dispersed. In both cell lines, the dispersed breakpoints show enrichment for low copy repeats, while the clustered breakpoints associate with high copy number amplifications. Comparing the two genomes, we observed highly similar structural mutational spectra affecting different sets of genes, pointing to similar histories of genomic instability against the background of very different gene network perturbations. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 39 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 33% |
| Researcher | 11 | 26% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 2 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 19% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 20 August 2019.
All research outputs
#4,835,823
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Genetics
#69
of 1,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,506
of 130,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Genetics
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,174 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 130,321 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them