↓ Skip to main content

Integrated analyses of copy number variations and gene differential expression in lung squamous-cell carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in Biological Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Integrated analyses of copy number variations and gene differential expression in lung squamous-cell carcinoma
Published in
Biological Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40659-015-0038-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhao Yang, Bing Zhuan, Ying Yan, Simin Jiang, Tao Wang

Abstract

Although numerous efforts have been made, the pathogenesis underlying lung squamous-cell carcinoma (SCC) remains unclear. This study aimed to identify the CNV-driven genes by an integrated analysis of both the gene differential expression and copy number variation (CNV). A higher burden of the CNVs was found in 10-50 kb length. The 16 CNV-driven genes mainly located in chr 1 and chr 3 were enriched in immune response [e.g. complement factor H (CFH) and Fc fragment of IgG, low affinity IIIa, receptor (FCGR3A)], starch and sucrose metabolism [e.g. amylase alpha 2A (AMY2A)]. Furthermore, 38 TFs were screened for the 9 CNV-driven genes and then the regulatory network was constructed, in which the GATA-binding factor 1, 2, and 3 (GATA1, GATA2, GATA3) jointly regulated the expression of TP63. The above CNV-driven genes might be potential contributors to the development of lung SCC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Materials Science 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 16%
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 26 August 2015.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Biological Research
#253
of 642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,896
of 277,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Research
#5
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 642 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 277,653 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 73% of its contemporaries.