↓ Skip to main content

The application of tetracyclineregulated gene expression systems in the validation of novel drug targets in Mycobacterium tuberculosis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 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
The application of tetracyclineregulated gene expression systems in the validation of novel drug targets in Mycobacterium tuberculosis
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00812
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanna C. Evans, Valerie Mizrahi

Abstract

Although efforts to identify novel therapies for the treatment of tuberculosis have led to the identification of several promising drug candidates, the identification of high-quality hits from conventional whole-cell screens remains disappointingly low. The elucidation of the genome sequence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) facilitated a shift to target-based approaches to drug design but these efforts have proven largely unsuccessful. More recently, regulated gene expression systems that enable dose-dependent modulation of gene expression have been applied in target validation to evaluate the requirement of individual genes for the growth of Mtb both in vitro and in vivo. Notably, these systems can also provide a measure of the extent to which putative targets must be depleted in order to manifest a growth inhibitory phenotype. Additionally, the successful implementation of Mtb strains engineered to under-express specific molecular targets in whole-cell screens has enabled the simultaneous identification of cell-permeant inhibitors with defined mechanisms of action. Here, we review the application of tetracycline-regulated gene expression systems in the validation of novel drug targets in Mtb, highlighting both the strengths and limitations associated with this approach to target validation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 2 2%
Unknown 102 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 17%
Researcher 17 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 25 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 26 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 August 2015.
All research outputs
#20,284,384
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,376
of 24,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,970
of 264,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#285
of 357 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,775 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 264,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 357 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.