You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Further in vitro evaluation of cytotoxicity of the marine natural product derivative 4′-leucine-avarone
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Natural Product Research, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1080/14786419.2013.863201 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Boris Pejin, Carmine Iodice, Giuseppina Tommonaro, Gordana Bogdanovic, Vesna Kojic, Salvatore De Rosa |
| Abstract |
The cytotoxicity of 4'-leucine-avarone, amino derivative of the sponge Dysidea avara secondary metabolite avarone, was evaluated by 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide assay in vitro against seven human solid tumours for the first time. The compound tested induced dose-dependent cytotoxic response in all cancer cells showing better activity towards the lung A-549 and colon HT-29 cell lines (IC50 7.40 μM and 9.62 μM, respectively) than towards the breast adenocarcinoma ER positive MCF-7 and ER negative MDA-MB-231 cells (IC50 11.64 μM and 17.31 μM, respectively), the prostate adenocarcinoma PC-3 and epiteloid cervix carcinoma HeLa cells (IC50 14.24 μM and 15.54 μM, respectively). No toxicity was found towards the foetal lung fibroblast MRC-5 cell line at the concentrations used. According to experimental data obtained, the sesquiterpenoid quinone structure of avarone may inspire development of new drug-like substances with improved cytotoxicity on lung cancer in humans. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 25% |
| Researcher | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 25% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 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 11 September 2014.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Natural Product Research
#907
of 2,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,414
of 321,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Natural Product Research
#10
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,395 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 321,181 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 51% of its contemporaries.