↓ Skip to main content

An Optimized Triple Modality Reporter for Quantitative In Vivo Tumor Imaging and Therapy Evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
An Optimized Triple Modality Reporter for Quantitative In Vivo Tumor Imaging and Therapy Evaluation
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0097415
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel A. Levin, Csilla N. Felsen, Jin Yang, John Y. Lin, Michael A. Whitney, Quyen T. Nguyen, Roger Y. Tsien

Abstract

We present an optimized triple modality reporter construct combining a far-red fluorescent protein (E2-Crimson), enhanced firefly luciferase enzyme (Luc2), and truncated wild type herpes simplex virus I thymidine kinase (wttk) that allows for sensitive, long-term tracking of tumor growth in vivo by fluorescence, bioluminescence, and positron emission tomography. Two human cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-231 breast cancer and HT-1080 fibrosarcoma cancer) were successfully transduced to express this triple modality reporter. Fluorescence and bioluminescence imaging of the triple modality reporter were used to accurately quantify the therapeutic responses of MDA-MB-231 tumors to the chemotherapeutic agent monomethyl auristatin E in vivo in athymic nude mice. Positive correlation was observed between the fluorescence and bioluminescence signals, and these signals were also positively correlated with the ex vivo tumor weights. This is the first reported use of both fluorescence and bioluminescence signals from a multi-modality reporter construct to measure drug efficacy in vivo.

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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Other 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Chemistry 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 6 14%
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 May 2014.
All research outputs
#18,371,959
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#154,400
of 194,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,089
of 227,219 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,532
of 4,702 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,177 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 227,219 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,702 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.