↓ Skip to main content

Gene mutations in gastric cancer: a review of recent next-generation sequencing studies

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Gene mutations in gastric cancer: a review of recent next-generation sequencing studies
Published in
Tumor Biology, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s13277-015-4002-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Y. Lin, Z. Wu, W. Guo, J. Li

Abstract

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Although some driver genes have been identified in GC, the molecular compositions of GC have not been fully understood. The development of next-generation sequencing (NGS) provides a high-throughput and systematic method to identify all genetic alterations in the cancer genome, especially in the field of mutation detection. NGS studies in GC have discovered some novel driver mutations. In this review, we focused on novel gene mutations discovered by NGS studies, along with some well-known driver genes in GC. We organized mutated genes from the perspective of related biological pathways. Mutations in genes relating to genome integrity (TP53, BRCA2), chromatin remodeling (ARID1A), cell adhesion (CDH1, FAT4, CTNNA1), cytoskeleton and cell motility (RHOA), Wnt pathway (CTNNB1, APC, RNF43), and RTK pathway (RTKs, RAS family, MAPK pathway, PIK pathway) are discussed. Efforts to establish a molecular classification based on NGS data which is valuable for future targeted therapy for GC are introduced. Comprehensive dissection of the molecular profile of GC cannot only unveil the molecular basis for GC but also identify genes of clinical utility, especially potential and specific therapeutic targets for GC.

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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 62 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 27%
Researcher 10 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Other 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 22%
Engineering 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 12 19%
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 14 September 2015.
All research outputs
#15,346,908
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,050
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,952
of 267,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#66
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 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 267,845 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 239 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 64% of its contemporaries.