↓ Skip to main content

American Association for Cancer Research

Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 3 Is a Rational Therapeutic Target in Bladder Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
patent
28 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 3 Is a Rational Therapeutic Target in Bladder Cancer
Published in
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, July 2013
DOI 10.1158/1535-7163.mct-12-1150
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kilian M. Gust, David J. McConkey, Shannon Awrey, Paul K. Hegarty, Jing Qing, Jolanta Bondaruk, Avi Ashkenazi, Bogdan Czerniak, Colin P. Dinney, Peter C. Black

Abstract

Activating mutations of fibroblast growth factor receptor-3 (FGFR3) have been described in approximately 75% of low-grade papillary bladder tumors. In muscle-invasive disease, FGFR3 mutations are found in 20% of tumors, but overexpression of FGFR3 is observed in about half of cases. Therefore, FGFR3 is a particularly promising target for therapy in bladder cancer. Up to now, most drugs tested for inhibition of FGFR3 have been small molecule, multityrosine kinase inhibitors. More recently, a specific inhibitory monoclonal antibody targeting FGFR3 (R3Mab) has been described and tested preclinically. In this study, we have evaluated mutation and expression status of FGFR3 in 19 urothelial cancer cell lines and a cohort of 170 American patients with bladder cancer. We have shown inhibitory activity of R3Mab on tumor growth and corresponding cell signaling in three different orthotopic xenografts of bladder cancer. Our results provide the preclinical proof of principle necessary to translate FGFR3 inhibition with R3Mab into clinical trials in patients with bladder cancer.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 23%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Other 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 19%
Chemistry 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 21 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 26 March 2024.
All research outputs
#2,914,198
of 24,127,822 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
#394
of 3,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,344
of 198,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
#7
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,127,822 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,950 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 198,119 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 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 90% of its contemporaries.