| Title |
Fusobacterium nucleatum, inflammation, and immunity: the fire within human gut
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-4724-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arif Bashir, Abid Yousuf Miskeen, Younis Mohammad Hazari, Syed Asrafuzzaman, Khalid Majid Fazili |
| Abstract |
Fusobacterium nucleatum is an identified proinflammatory autochthonous bacterium implicated in human colorectal cancer. It is also abundantly found in patients suffering from chronic gut inflammation (inflammatory bowel disease), consequently contributing to the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer. Majority of the studies have reported that colorectal tumors/colorectal adenocarcinomas are highly enriched with F. nucleatum compared to noninvolved adjacent colonic tissue. During the course of multistep development of colorectal cancer, tumors have evolved many mechanisms to resist the antitumor immune response. One of such favorite ploy is providing access to pathogenic bacteria, especially F. nucleatum in the colorectal tumor microenvironment, wherein both (colorectal tumors and F. nucleatum) exert profound effect on each other, consequently attracting tumor-permissive myeloid-derived suppressor cells, suppressing cytotoxic CD8+ T cells and inhibiting NK cell-mediated cancer cell killing. In this review, we have primarily focused on how this bug modulates the immune response, consequently rendering the antitumor immune cells inactive. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 113 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 22 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 23% |
| Unknown | 22 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 18% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 17 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 16 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Unknown | 26 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 17 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,639,631
of 25,729,842 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#16
of 2,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,307
of 401,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#2
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,729,842 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,680 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 401,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.