| Title |
Neurotrophin signaling in cancer stem cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00018-016-2156-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valérie Chopin, Chann Lagadec, Robert-Alain Toillon, Xuefen Le Bourhis |
| Abstract |
Cancer stem cells (CSCs), are thought to be at the origin of tumor development and resistance to therapies. Thus, a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in the control of CSC stemness is essential to the design of more effective therapies for cancer patients. Cancer cell stemness and the subsequent expansion of CSCs are regulated by micro-environmental signals including neurotrophins. Over the years, the roles of neurotrophins in tumor development have been well established and regularly reviewed. Especially, nerve growth factor (NGF) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) are reported to stimulate tumor cell proliferation, survival, migration and/or invasion, and favors tumor angiogenesis. More recently, neurotrophins have been reported to regulate CSCs. This review briefly presents neurotrophins and their receptors, summarizes their roles in different cancers, and discusses the emerging evidence of neurotrophins-induced enrichment of CSCs as well as the involved signaling pathways. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 21% |
| Researcher | 13 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 20 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 20 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,979,550
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#3,073
of 4,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,250
of 299,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#37
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 299,596 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.