↓ Skip to main content

Drosophila Models for Human Diseases

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 10: Drosophila As a Cancer Model
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
55 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.
Chapter title
Drosophila As a Cancer Model
Chapter number 10
Book title
Drosophila Models for Human Diseases
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-981-13-0529-0_10
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-81-130528-3, 978-9-81-130529-0
Authors

Masato Enomoto, Carmen Siow, Tatsushi Igaki, Enomoto, Masato, Siow, Carmen, Igaki, Tatsushi

Abstract

Over the last few decades, Drosophila cancer models have made great contributions to our understanding toward fundamental cancer processes. Particularly, the development of genetic mosaic technique in Drosophila has enabled us to recapitulate basic aspects of human cancers, including clonal evolution, tumor microenvironment, cancer cachexia, and anticancer drug resistance. The mosaic technique has also led to the discovery of important tumor-suppressor pathways such as the Hippo pathway and the elucidation of the mechanisms underlying tumor growth and metastasis via regulation of cell polarity, cell-cell cooperation, and cell competition. Recent approaches toward identification of novel therapeutics using fly cancer models have further proved Drosophila as a robust system with great potentials for cancer research as well as anti-cancer therapy.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 22%
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 15 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 15%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 33%
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 03 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,718,998
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#2,171
of 5,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,612
of 444,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#83
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,040 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 444,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.