↓ Skip to main content

Choosing the right cell line for breast cancer research

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, August 2011
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
patent
1 patent
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
1039 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2417 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Choosing the right cell line for breast cancer research
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, August 2011
DOI 10.1186/bcr2889
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah L Holliday, Valerie Speirs

Abstract

Breast cancer is a complex and heterogeneous disease. Gene expression profiling has contributed significantly to our understanding of this heterogeneity at a molecular level, refining taxonomy based on simple measures such as histological type, tumour grade, lymph node status and the presence of predictive markers like oestrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) to a more sophisticated classification comprising luminal A, luminal B, basal-like, HER2-positive and normal subgroups. In the laboratory, breast cancer is often modelled using established cell lines. In the present review we discuss some of the issues surrounding the use of breast cancer cell lines as experimental models, in light of these revised clinical classifications, and put forward suggestions for improving their use in translational breast cancer research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,417 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 22 <1%
United Kingdom 9 <1%
Spain 5 <1%
India 4 <1%
Chile 3 <1%
Malaysia 3 <1%
Italy 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Other 32 1%
Unknown 2332 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 607 25%
Student > Master 393 16%
Student > Bachelor 369 15%
Researcher 340 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 113 5%
Other 307 13%
Unknown 288 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 687 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 579 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 271 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 116 5%
Engineering 114 5%
Other 278 12%
Unknown 372 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 05 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,716,813
of 21,562,248 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#170
of 1,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,506
of 305,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#1
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,562,248 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,841 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 305,182 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 92% 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.