| Title |
Molecular Bio-Imaging Probe for Non-Invasive Differentiation Between Human Leiomyoma Versus Leiomyosarcoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reproductive Sciences, January 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s43032-019-00067-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shahinaz Shalaby, Mostafa Khater, Archana Laknaur, Ali Arbab, Ayman Al-Hendy |
| Abstract |
Leiomyosarcoma is the most frequent subtype of the deadly uterine sarcoma and shares many common clinical grounds with leiomyoma, which is in turn the most common solid benign uterine neoplasm. With the recent progress in minimally invasive techniques for managing leiomyomas, accurate preoperative diagnosis of uterine masses has become the most important selection criterion for the safest therapeutic option. Therefore, different imaging modalities would be playing a key role in management of uterine masses. Testing for a sarcoma-specific promoter that expresses its downstream reporter gene only in leiomyosarcoma and not in leiomyoma or healthy uterine tissue. Adenoviral vectors were utilized both in vitro and in vivo to test the specificity of the promoters. Quantitative studies of downstream gene expression of these promoters was carried out both in vitro and in vivo. Our data indicated that human leiomyosarcoma cells highly expressed the reporter gene downstream to survivin promoter (Ad-SUR-LUC) when compared with benign leiomyoma or normal cells (p value of 0.05). Our study suggested that survivin is the unique promoter capable of distinguishing between the deadly sarcoma and the benign counterparts. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 8 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 25% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 25% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
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 12 January 2020.
All research outputs
#18,046,378
of 23,186,937 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Sciences
#651
of 1,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#315,930
of 456,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Sciences
#41
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,186,937 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 1,236 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 456,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 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 57% of its contemporaries.