↓ Skip to main content

High serum miR-183 level is associated with poor responsiveness of renal cancer to natural killer cells

Overview of attention for article published in Tumor Biology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
High serum miR-183 level is associated with poor responsiveness of renal cancer to natural killer cells
Published in
Tumor Biology, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s13277-015-3604-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qunmei Zhang, Wenyu Di, Yuqian Dong, Guangjian Lu, Jian Yu, Jinsong Li, Pingfa Li

Abstract

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is among the most common subtype of kidney cancers, and the current therapeutic strategies are not efficient. Natural killer (NK) cells are biological agents that can induce apoptosis in a wide range of cancer cells. However, most of RCC patients exhibit resistance against the action of NK cells due to unknown mechanisms. This study is aimed to identify a biomarker that can predict the response of RCC cells to NK cell treatment. We collected 82 RCC patients and 19 healthy volunteers to detect the expression of miR-183 in blood by qPCR assays. The results revealed that serum miR-183 is significantly higher in RCC patients than in healthy controls, and its level is positively associated with the grading of RCC. Furthermore, (51)Cr release assays indicated that the primary RCC cells with low serum miR-183 expression are more sensitive to the cytotoxicity of NK cells. Collectively, we demonstrated that serum miR-183 can be used to predict the response of RCC cells to the cytotoxicity induced by NK cells.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 38%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Lecturer 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 3 19%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 April 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
#154,371
of 264,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#40
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 264,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 67% of its contemporaries.