↓ Skip to main content

Glycomic profiling of carcinoembryonic antigen isolated from human tumor tissue

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Proteomics, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Glycomic profiling of carcinoembryonic antigen isolated from human tumor tissue
Published in
Clinical Proteomics, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12014-015-9088-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chuncui Huang, Tiancheng Zhan, Yaming Liu, Qianqian Li, Hongmei Wu, Dengbo Ji, Yan Li

Abstract

Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is a protein commonly found in human serum, with elevated CEA levels being linked to the progression of a wide range of tumors. It is currently used as a biomarker for malign tumors such as lung cancer and colorectal cancer [Urol Oncol: Semin Orig Invest 352: 644-648, 2013 and Lung Cancer 80: 45-49, 2013]. However, due to its low specificity in clinical applications, CEA can be used for monitoring only, rather than tumor diagnosis. The function of many glycoproteins is critically dependent on their glycosylation pattern, which in turn has the potential to serve in tumor detection. However, little is known about the detailed glycan patterns of CEA. To determine these patterns, we isolated and purified CEA proteins from human tumor tissues using immunoaffinity chromatography. The glycan patterns of CEA were then analyzed using a Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization-Time of Flight-Mass Spectrometry(3) (MALDI-TOF-MS(3)) approach. We identified 61 glycoforms in tumor tissue, where CEA is upregulated. These glycosylation entities were identified as bi-antennary, tri-antennary and tetra-antennary structures carrying sialic acid and fucose residues, and include a multitude of glycans previously not reported for CEA. Our findings should facilitate a more precise tumor prediction than currently possible, ultimately resulting in improved tumor diagnosis and treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Researcher 3 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Other 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 10 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 22%
Chemistry 3 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 13 48%
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 27 June 2015.
All research outputs
#15,338,777
of 22,815,414 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Proteomics
#177
of 284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,815
of 263,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Proteomics
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,815,414 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 263,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.