↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
3D-cultivation of NSCLC cell lines induce gene expression alterations of key cancer-associated pathways and mimic in-vivo conditions
Published in
Oncotarget, November 2017
DOI 10.18632/oncotarget.22636
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This work evaluated gene expression differences between a hanging-drop 3D NSCLC model and 2D cell cultures and their in-vivo relevance by comparison to patient-derived data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Gene expression of 2D and 3D cultures for Colo699 and A549 were assessed using Affymetrix HuGene 1.0 ST gene chips. Biostatistical analyses tested for reproducibility, comparability and significant differences in gene expression profiles between cell lines, experiments and culture methods. The analyses revealed a high interassay correlation within specific culture systems proving a high validity. 979 genes were altered in A549 and 1106 in Colo699 cells due to 3D cultivation. The overlap of changed genes between the cell lines was small (149), but the involved pathways in the reactome and GO- analyses showed a high overlap with DNA methylation, cell cycle, SIRT1, PKN1 pathway, DNA repair and oxidative stress as well known cancer-associated representatives. Additional specific GSEA-analyses revealed changes in immunologic and endothelial cell proliferation pathways, whereas hypoxic, EMT and angiogenic pathways were downregulated. Gene enrichment analyses showed 3D-induced gene up-regulations in the cell lines 38 to be represented in in-vivo samples of NSCLC patients using data of The Cancer Genome Atlas. Thus, our 3D NSCLC model might provide a tool for early drug development and investigation of microenvironment-associated mechanisms. However, this work also highlights the need for further individualization and model adaption to address remaining challenges.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 20 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Chemistry 2 3%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 25 42%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 February 2018.
All research outputs
#25,801,954
of 32,145,349 outputs
Outputs from Oncotarget
#10,421
of 15,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274,458
of 363,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oncotarget
#672
of 1,056 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,145,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 363,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,056 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.