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 |
Levels of Expression of CYR61 and CTGF Are Prognostic for Tumor Progression and Survival of Individuals with Gliomas
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Cancer Research, March 2004
|
| DOI | 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-0659-03 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dong Xie, Dong Yin, He-Jing Wang, Gen-Tao Liu, Robert Elashoff, Keith Black, H. Phillip Koeffler |
| Abstract |
The biological properties of CCN proteins include stimulation of cell proliferation, migration, and adhesion, as well as angiogenesis and tumorigenesis. We quantified CYR61, CTGF, WISP-1, and NOV mRNA expression levels in samples from sixty-six primary gliomas and five normal brain samples using quantitative real-time PCR assay. Statistical analysis was performed to explore the links between expression of the CCN genes and clinical and pathological parameters. Overexpression of CYR61, CTGF, WISP-1, and NOV occurred in 48% (32 of 66), 58% (38 of 66), 36% (24 of 66), and 15% (10 of 66) of primary gliomas, respectively. Interestingly, significant associations were found between CYR61 expression versus tumor grade, pathology, gender, and age at diagnosis. Also, a significant correlation existed between CTGF mRNA levels versus tumor grade, gender, and pathology. In contrast to CYR61 and CTGF, no significant association was found between expression of either WISP-1 or NOV versus any of the pathological features. Furthermore, Cox regression analysis showed that CYR61 and CTGF expression had a significant correlation with patient survival. These results suggest that CYR61 and CTGF may play a role in the progression of gliomas; their levels at diagnosis may have prognostic significance; and these proteins might serve as valuable targets for therapeutic intervention. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 7% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 41 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 8 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 May 2014.
All research outputs
#7,564,023
of 23,072,295 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Cancer Research
#6,821
of 12,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,137
of 58,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Cancer Research
#92
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,072,295 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,659 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 58,251 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 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.