↓ Skip to main content

Cell-in-cell structures are more potent predictors of outcome than senescence or apoptosis in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Cell-in-cell structures are more potent predictors of outcome than senescence or apoptosis in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas
Published in
Radiation Oncology, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13014-016-0746-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah Schenker, Maike Büttner-Herold, Rainer Fietkau, Luitpold V. Distel

Abstract

This study sheds light on cell inactivating processes with focus on the phenomenon of cell-in-cell (CIC). Cell-in-cell describes a cell process where one cell is being engulfed by another non-professional phagocyte. We determined frequency and prognostic impact of CIC structures (CICs) as well as of senescent and apoptotic cells in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC). These different forms of cell inactivation as well as the proportion of proliferating and tumor cells were assessed in 169 pre-radiochemotherapy biopsies and 32 post-therapy tumor resections by immunohistochemistry of tissue microarrays. Four consecutive cancer sections were stained with antibodies specific for E-cadherin for CIC detection, cleaved caspase-3 for apoptosis, H3K9Me for senescence and Ki67 as a proliferation marker. Positive events were quantified in corresponding tumor areas. CICs were found in 55.5%, senescent cells in 67.1% and apoptotic cells in 93.3% of samples. While no prognostic impact of apoptotic and senescent cells was observed, CICs turned out to significantly influence overall-survival (p = 0.016) with a lack of CICs being prognostically beneficial. There was no correlation between CICs and apoptosis and 98.9% of CICs were negative for cleaved caspase-3. CIC formation is a frequent event in HNSCC and a superior predictive marker compared to senescence and apoptosis. Independence of CIC and apoptosis and the adverse prognosis associated with numerous CICs lead to the assumption that CICs might take up necrotic rather than apoptotic cells preventing an adequate antitumoral immune response that would otherwise be initiated by necrotic cells through damage-associated molecular pattern molecules.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 7 23%
Unknown 8 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 7 23%
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 19 January 2018.
All research outputs
#18,583,054
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,429
of 2,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#309,629
of 418,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#15
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 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 2,073 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 418,750 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 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.