| Title |
Recurrent CDK1 overexpression in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-016-4991-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
K. Bednarek, K. Kiwerska, M. Szaumkessel, M. Bodnar, M. Kostrzewska-Poczekaj, A. Marszalek, J. Janiszewska, A. Bartochowska, J. Jackowska, M. Wierzbicka, R. Grenman, K. Szyfter, M. Giefing, M. Jarmuz-Szymczak |
| Abstract |
In this study, we analyzed the expression profile of four genes (CCNA2, CCNB1, CCNB2, and CDK1) in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) cell lines and tumor samples. With the application of microarray platform, we have shown the overexpression of these genes in all analyzed LSCC samples in comparison to non-cancer controls from head and neck region. We have selected CDK1 for further analysis, due to its leading role in cell cycle regulation. It is a member of the Ser/Thr protein kinase family of proven oncogenic properties. The results obtained for CDK1 were further confirmed with the application of reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) technique, Western blot, and immunohistochemistry (IHC). The observed upregulation of CDK1 in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma has encouraged us to analyze for genetic mechanisms that can be responsible this phenomenon. Therefore, with the application of array-CGH, sequencing analysis and two methods for epigenetic regulation analysis (DNA methylation and miRNA expression), we tried to identify such potential mechanisms. Our attempts to identify the molecular mechanisms responsible for observed changes failed as we did not observe significant alterations neither in the DNA sequence nor in the gene copy number that could underline CDK1 upregulation. Similarly, the pyrosequencing and miRNA expression analyses did not reveal any differences in methylation level and miRNA expression, respectively; thus, these mechanisms probably do not contribute to elevation of CDK1 expression in LSCC. However, our results suggest that alteration of CDK1 expression on both mRNA and protein level probably appears on the very early step of carcinogenesis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 32 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 18% |
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 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,789,675
of 22,851,489 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,219
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,146
of 298,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#40
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,851,489 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 298,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.