↓ Skip to main content

Epigenetic impact of infection on carcinogenesis: mechanisms and applications

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 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
Epigenetic impact of infection on carcinogenesis: mechanisms and applications
Published in
Genome Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13073-016-0267-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Naoko Hattori, Toshikazu Ushijima

Abstract

Viral and bacterial infections are involved in the development of human cancers, such as liver, nasopharyngeal, cervical, head and neck, and gastric cancers. Aberrant DNA methylation is frequently present in these cancers, and some of the aberrantly methylated genes are causally involved in cancer development and progression. Notably, aberrant DNA methylation can be present even in non-cancerous or precancerous tissues, and its levels correlate with the risk of cancer development, producing a so-called 'epigenetic field for cancerization'. Mechanistically, most viral or bacterial infections induce DNA methylation indirectly via chronic inflammation, but recent studies have indicated that some viruses have direct effects on the epigenetic machinery of host cells. From a translational viewpoint, a recent multicenter prospective cohort study demonstrated that assessment of the extent of alterations in DNA methylation in non-cancerous tissues can be used to predict cancer risk. Furthermore, suppression of aberrant DNA methylation was shown to be a useful strategy for cancer prevention in an animal model. Here, we review the involvement of aberrant DNA methylation in various types of infection-associated cancers, along with individual induction mechanisms, and we discuss the application of these findings for cancer prevention, diagnosis, and therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 145 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 12%
Student > Master 18 12%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 36 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 39 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 21 June 2017.
All research outputs
#5,446,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#1,027
of 1,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,221
of 405,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#25
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 405,486 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.