↓ Skip to main content

SUSD2 is frequently downregulated and functions as a tumor suppressor in RCC and lung cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Tumor Biology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
SUSD2 is frequently downregulated and functions as a tumor suppressor in RCC and lung cancer
Published in
Tumor Biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13277-015-4734-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yingying Cheng, Xiaolin Wang, Pingzhang Wang, Ting Li, Fengzhan Hu, Qiang Liu, Fan Yang, Jun Wang, Tao Xu, Wenling Han

Abstract

Sushi domain containing 2 (SUSD2) is type I membrane protein containing domains inherent to adhesion molecules. There have been few reported studies on SUSD2, and they have mainly focused on breast cancer, colon cancer, and HeLa cells. However, the expression and function of SUSD2 in other cancers remain unclear. In the present study, we conducted an integrated bioinformatics analysis based on the array data from the GEO database and found a significant downregulation of SUSD2 in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and lung cancer. Western blotting and quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) confirmed that SUSD2 was frequently decreased in RCC and lung cancer tissues compared with the corresponding levels in normal adjacent tissues. The restoration of SUSD2 expression inhibited the proliferation and clonogenicity of RCC and lung cancer cells, whereas the knockdown of SUSD2 promoted A549 cell growth. Our findings suggested that SUSD2 functions as a tumor suppressor gene (TSG) in RCC and lung cancer.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 25%
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Lecturer 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 10 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,966,011
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#329
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,704
of 396,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#24
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,622 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 396,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.