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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Autophagy Suppresses RIP Kinase-Dependent Necrosis Enabling Survival to mTOR Inhibition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0041831 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kevin Bray, Robin Mathew, Alexandria Lau, Jurre J. Kamphorst, Jing Fan, Jim Chen, Hsin-Yi Chen, Anahita Ghavami, Mark Stein, Robert S. DiPaola, Donna Zhang, Joshua D. Rabinowitz, Eileen White |
| Abstract |
mTOR inhibitors are used clinically to treat renal cancer but are not curative. Here we show that autophagy is a resistance mechanism of human renal cell carcinoma (RCC) cell lines to mTOR inhibitors. RCC cell lines have high basal autophagy that is required for survival to mTOR inhibition. In RCC4 cells, inhibition of mTOR with CCI-779 stimulates autophagy and eliminates RIP kinases (RIPKs) and this is blocked by autophagy inhibition, which induces RIPK- and ROS-dependent necroptosis in vitro and suppresses xenograft growth. Autophagy of mitochondria is required for cell survival since mTOR inhibition turns off Nrf2 antioxidant defense. Thus, coordinate mTOR and autophagy inhibition leads to an imbalance between ROS production and defense, causing necroptosis that may enhance cancer treatment efficacy. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 134 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 25% |
| Researcher | 26 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 19% |
| Unknown | 21 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 41 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 26 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 24 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 May 2014.
All research outputs
#6,379,761
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#76,348
of 193,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,048
of 164,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,317
of 3,986 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 164,574 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,986 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 64% of its contemporaries.