| Title |
HPV-type-specific response of cervical cancer cells to cisplatin after silencing replication licensing factor MCM4
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tumor Biology, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13277-015-3782-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mitali Das, Shyam Babu Prasad, Suresh Singh Yadav, Arusha Modi, Sunita Singh, Satyajit Pradhan, Gopeshwar Narayan |
| Abstract |
Minichoromosome maintenance (MCM) proteins play key role in cell cycle progression by licensing DNA replication only once per cell cycle. These proteins are found to be overexpressed in cervical cancer cells. In this study, we depleted MCM4, one of the MCM 2-7 complex components by RNA interference (RNAi) in four cervical cancer cell lines. The four cell lines were selected on the basis of their human papillomavirus (HPV) infection: HPV16-positive SiHa, HPV18-positive ME-180, HPV16- and HPV18-positive CaSki, and HPV-negative C-33A. The MCM4-deficient cells irrespective of their HPV status grow for several generations and maintain regular cell cycle. We did not find any evidence of augmented response to a short-term (48 h) cisplatin treatment in these MCM4-deficient cells. However, MCM4-/HPV16+ SiHa cells cannot withstand a prolonged treatment (up to 5 days) of even a sublethal dosage of cisplatin. They show increased chromosomal instability compared to their control counterparts. On the other hand, MCM4-deficient CaSki cells (both HPV16+ and 18+) remain resistant to a prolonged exposure to cisplatin. Our study indicates that cervical cancer cells may be using excess MCMs as a backup for replicative stress; however, its regulatory mechanism is dependent on the HPV status of the cells. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 18% |
| Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 18% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
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 April 2016.
All research outputs
#18,453,763
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,370
of 2,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,779
of 263,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#74
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,623 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 263,944 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.