↓ Skip to main content

Tumour promotion versus tumour suppression in chronic hepatic iron overload

Overview of attention for article published in Cell Biochemistry and Function, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
Tumour promotion versus tumour suppression in chronic hepatic iron overload
Published in
Cell Biochemistry and Function, June 2015
DOI 10.1002/cbf.3110
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Although iron-catalysed oxidative damage is presumed to be a major mechanism of injury leading to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma in hemochromatosis, these events have been difficult to recapitulate in an animal model. In this study, we evaluated regulators of hepatocarcinogenesis in a rodent model of chronic iron overload. Sprague-Dawley rats were iron loaded with iron dextran over 6 months. Livers were harvested and analysed for markers of oxidative stress, as well as the following proteins: p53, murine double minute 2, the Shc proteins p66, p52, p46; β-catenin, CHOP, C/EBPα and Yes-associated protein. In this model, iron loading is associated with hepatocyte proliferation, and indices of oxidative damage are mildly increased in tandem with augmented antioxidant defenses. Alterations potentially favouring carcinogenesis included a modest but significant decrease in p53 levels and increases in p52, p46 and β-catenin levels compared with control livers. Countering these factors, the iron-loaded livers demonstrated a significant decrease in CHOP, which has recently been implicated in the development of hepatocellular carcinoma, as well as a reciprocal increase in C/EBPα and decrease in Yes-associated protein. Our results suggest that chronic iron overload elicits both tumour suppressive as well as tumour-promoting mechanisms in rodent liver. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 5 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 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 2 40%
Professor 1 20%
Researcher 1 20%
Student > Postgraduate 1 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 60%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 20%
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 09 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,000,155
of 24,577,646 outputs
Outputs from Cell Biochemistry and Function
#417
of 762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,436
of 271,209 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Biochemistry and Function
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,577,646 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 762 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 271,209 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.