↓ Skip to main content

Combining phenotypic and proteomic approaches to identify membrane targets in a ‘triple negative’ breast cancer cell type

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cancer, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
7 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 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.
Title
Combining phenotypic and proteomic approaches to identify membrane targets in a ‘triple negative’ breast cancer cell type
Published in
Molecular Cancer, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1476-4598-12-11
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven Rust, Sandrine Guillard, Kris Sachsenmeier, Carl Hay, Max Davidson, Anders Karlsson, Roger Karlsson, Erin Brand, David Lowne, John Elvin, Matt Flynn, Gene Kurosawa, Robert Hollingsworth, Lutz Jermutus, Ralph Minter

Abstract

The continued discovery of therapeutic antibodies, which address unmet medical needs, requires the continued discovery of tractable antibody targets. Multiple protein-level target discovery approaches are available and these can be used in combination to extensively survey relevant cell membranomes. In this study, the MDA-MB-231 cell line was selected for membranome survey as it is a 'triple negative' breast cancer cell line, which represents a cancer subtype that is aggressive and has few treatment options.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 3%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 112 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 37 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 17%
Other 12 10%
Student > Master 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 5%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 21 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 5%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 23 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 21 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,760,136
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cancer
#168
of 1,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,887
of 296,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cancer
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 296,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.