↓ Skip to main content

Intracellular trafficking as a determinant of AS-DACA cytotoxicity in rhabdomyosarcoma cells

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, August 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Intracellular trafficking as a determinant of AS-DACA cytotoxicity in rhabdomyosarcoma cells
Published in
BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, August 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2121-12-36
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven J Wolf, Tony Huynh, Nicole S Bryce, Trevor W Hambley, Laurence PG Wakelin, Bernard W Stewart, Daniel R Catchpoole

Abstract

Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is a malignant soft tissue sarcoma derived from skeletal muscle precursor cells, which accounts for 5-8% of all childhood malignancies. Disseminated RMS represents a major clinical obstacle, and the need for better treatment strategies for the clinically aggressive alveolar RMS subtype is particularly apparent. Previously, we have shown that the acridine-4-carboxamide derivative AS-DACA, a known topoisomerase II poison, is potently cytotoxic in the alveolar RMS cell line RH30, but is 190-fold less active in the embryonal RMS cell line RD. Here, we investigate the basis for this selectivity, and demonstrate in these RMS lines, and in an AS-DACA- resistant subclone of RH30, that AS-DACA-induced cytotoxicity correlates with the induction of DNA double strand breaks.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 20%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 6 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Chemistry 2 8%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 7 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 October 2011.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#740
of 1,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,585
of 134,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#12
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,233 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 134,584 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.