↓ Skip to main content

Decoy receptors block TRAIL sensitivity at a supracellular level: the role of stromal cells in controlling tumour TRAIL sensitivity

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
Decoy receptors block TRAIL sensitivity at a supracellular level: the role of stromal cells in controlling tumour TRAIL sensitivity
Published in
Oncogene, June 2015
DOI 10.1038/onc.2015.180
Pubmed ID
Authors

L O'Leary, A M van der Sloot, C R Reis, S Deegan, A E Ryan, S P S Dhami, L S Murillo, R H Cool, P Correa de Sampaio, K Thompson, G Murphy, W J Quax, L Serrano, A Samali, E Szegezdi

Abstract

Tumour necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) is a death ligand cytokine known for its cytotoxic activity against malignantly transformed cells. TRAIL induces cell death through binding to death receptors DR4 and DR5. The inhibitory decoy receptors (DcR1 and DcR2) co-expressed with death receptor 4 (DR4)/DR5 on the same cell can block the transmission of the apoptotic signal. Here, we show that DcRs also regulate TRAIL sensitivity at a supracellular level and thus represent a mechanism by which the microenvironment can diminish tumour TRAIL sensitivity. Mathematical modelling and layered or spheroid stroma-extracellular matrix-tumour cultures were used to model the tumour microenvironment. By engineering TRAIL to escape binding by DcRs, we found that DcRs do not only act in a cell-autonomous or cis-regulatory manner, but also exert trans-cellular regulation originating from stromal cells and affect tumour cells, highlighting the potent inhibitory effect of DcRs in the tumour tissue and the necessity of selective targeting of the two death-inducing TRAIL receptors to maximise efficacy.Oncogene advance online publication, 8 June 2015; doi:10.1038/onc.2015.180.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 45 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 32%
Student > Master 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Other 11 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Unspecified 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 9%
Other 6 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 June 2014.
All research outputs
#2,723,963
of 10,098,073 outputs
Outputs from Oncogene
#1,421
of 5,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,021
of 277,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oncogene
#93
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 10,098,073 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 55th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,490 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 277,030 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.