| Title |
Pseudogene-expressed RNAs: a new frontier in cancers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-4482-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xuefei Shi, Fengqi Nie, Zhaoxia Wang, Ming Sun |
| Abstract |
Over the past decade, the importance of non-protein-coding functional elements in the human genome has emerged from the water and been identified as a key revelation in post-genomic biology. Since the completion of the ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA Elements) and FANTOM (Functional Annotation of Mammals) project, tens of thousands of pseudogenes as well as numerous long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) genes were identified. However, while pseudogenes were initially regarded as non-functional relics littering the human genome during evolution, recent studies have revealed that they play critical roles at multiple levels in diverse physiological and pathological processes, especially in cancer through parental-gene-dependent or parental-gene-independent regulation. Herein, we review the current knowledge of pseudogenes and synthesize the nascent evidence for functional properties and regulatory modalities exerted by pseudogene-transcribed RNAs in human cancers and prospect the potential as molecular signatures in cancer reclassification and tailored therapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 31% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 34% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
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 15 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,432,465
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,369
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#280,831
of 388,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#112
of 298 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 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 388,829 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 298 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.