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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Natural and Synthetic Flavonoids: Structure–Activity Relationship and Chemotherapeutic Potential for the Treatment of Leukemia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1080/10408398.2015.1074532 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
José C. J. M. D. S. Menezes, Barbora Orlikova, Franck Morceau, Marc Diederich |
| Abstract |
Flavonoids and their derivatives are polyphenolic secondary metabolites with an extensive spectrum of pharmacological activities, including antioxidants, antitumor, anti-inflammatory, and antiviral activities. These flavonoids can also act as chemopreventive agents by their interaction with different proteins and can play a vital role in chemotherapy, suggesting a positive correlation between a lower risk of cancer and a flavonoid-rich diet. These agents interfere with the main hallmarks of cancer by various individual mechanisms, such as inhibition of cell growth and proliferation by arresting the cell cycle, induction of apoptosis and differentiation, or a combination of these mechanisms. This review is an effort to highlight the therapeutic potential of natural and synthetic flavonoids as anticancer agents in leukemia treatment with respect to the structure-activity relationship (SAR) and their molecular mechanisms. Induction of cell death mechanisms, production of reactive oxygen species, and drug resistance mechanisms, including p-glycoprotein efflux, are among the best-described effects triggered by the flavonoid polyphenol family. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 102 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 15% |
| Researcher | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 15% |
| Unknown | 26 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 10 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 12% |
| Unknown | 36 | 35% |
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 16 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,348,897
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition
#1,628
of 2,362 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,564
of 279,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition
#26
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 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 2,362 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 279,229 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 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.