| Title |
Polymorphisms of FGFR1 in HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-3643-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haiyang Xie, Chunyang Xing, Bajin Wei, Xiao Xu, Liming Wu, Jian Wu, Leiming Chen, Guoqiang Cao, Hai Chen, Xueqin Meng, Shengyong Yin, Lin Zhou, Shusen Zheng |
| Abstract |
Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-induced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers in China. It is important to understand the genetic mechanisms underlying the development and progression of HBV-related HCC and to identify new biomarkers for clinical treatment. The important role of fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFRs) has been widely recognized in many types of cancers, but the association between FGFR polymorphisms and HCC carcinogenesis has been rarely reported. In this study, 199 patients with HBV-associated cirrhosis, 203 with HBV-associated HCC, and 184 healthy controls with no liver diseases were enrolled as participants. Using SNaPshot assays, five SNPs (rs13317, rs7825208, rs1047057, rs1047111, and rs1966265) of growth factor receptor genes were genotyped. Our results showed that the G/A and G/G genotypes at rs7825208 of FGFR1 were negatively correlated with HBV-related HCC (odds ratio (OR) = 0.45, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.22-0.93, P = 0.027). However, after Bonferroni correction, these significant differences no longer existed (P > 0.05). Our results indicated that these five polymorphisms of fibroblast growth factor receptor genes do not play any independent roles in the tumorigenesis and progression of HBV-related HCC in Han Chinese patients. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 20% |
| Researcher | 2 | 20% |
| Professor | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 40% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 10% |
| Psychology | 1 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
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 30 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,337,950
of 22,813,792 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,050
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,168
of 264,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#37
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,813,792 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 264,937 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.