| Title |
Immunocapture of prostate cancer cells by use of anti-PSMA antibodies in microdevices
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomedical Microdevices, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10544-011-9616-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Steven M. Santana, He Liu, Neil H. Bander, Jason P. Gleghorn, Brian J. Kirby |
| Abstract |
Patients suffering from cancer can shed tumor cells into the bloodstream, leading to one of the most important mechanisms of metastasis. As such, the capture of these cells is of great interest. Circulating tumor cells are typically extracted from circulation through positive selection with the epithelial cell-adhesion molecule (EpCAM), leading to currently unknown biases when cells are undergoing epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. For prostate cancer, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) presents a compelling target for immunocapture, as PSMA levels increase in higher-grade cancers and metastatic disease and are specific to the prostate epithelium. This study uses monoclonal antibodies J591 and J415-antibodies that are highly specific for intact extracellular domains of PSMA on live cells-in microfluidic devices for the capture of LNCaPs, a PSMA-expressing immortalized prostate cancer cell line, over a range of concentrations and shear stresses relevant to immunocapture. Our results show that J591 outperforms J415 and a mix of the two for prostate cancer capture, and that capture performance saturates following incubation with antibody concentrations of 10 micrograms per milliliter. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 57 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 32% |
| Researcher | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 19 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 January 2016.
All research outputs
#7,475,259
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Biomedical Microdevices
#233
of 747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,917
of 241,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomedical Microdevices
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 747 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 241,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.