↓ Skip to main content

Role of miR-138 in the regulation of larynx carcinoma cell metastases

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Role of miR-138 in the regulation of larynx carcinoma cell metastases
Published in
Tumor Biology, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s13277-015-4244-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shang Gao, Jie Wang, Jin Xie, Tianzhen Zhang, Pin Dong

Abstract

The cases of larynx carcinoma (LC) with poor prognosis largely result from the distal metastases of the primary tumor. Since microRNAs (miRNAs) play critical roles during cancer metastases, determination of the involved miRNAs in the regulation of the LC metastases may provide novel therapeutic targets for LC treatment. Here, we studied the LC specimens from the patients and found that the levels of miR-138 were significantly decreased and the levels of ZEB2, a critical factor that regulates cancer cell invasiveness, were significantly increased in LC, compared to the paired normal larynx tissue. Metastatic LC appeared to contained lower levels of miR-138. Moreover, miR-138 and ZEB2 inversely correlated in LC specimens. Bioinformatics analyses showed that miR-138 targeted the 3'-untranslated region (3'-UTR) of ZEB2 mRNA to inhibit its translation, which was confirmed in a luciferase reporter assay. Further, miR-138 overexpression inhibited ZEB2-mediated cell invasiveness, while miR-138 depletion increased ZEB2-mediated cell invasiveness in LC cells. Together, our data suggest that miR-138 suppression in LC cells may promote ZEB2-mediated cancer metastases. Thus, miR-138 appears to be an intriguing therapeutic target to prevent metastases of LC.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 8%
Unknown 12 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 2 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 15%
Researcher 2 15%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Psychology 1 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 38%
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 27 October 2015.
All research outputs
#18,429,163
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,369
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,229
of 283,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#118
of 279 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 283,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 279 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.