↓ Skip to main content

FOXM1b, which is present at elevated levels in cancer cells, has a greater transforming potential than FOXM1c

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
FOXM1b, which is present at elevated levels in cancer cells, has a greater transforming potential than FOXM1c
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2013.00011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andy K. Y. Lam, Adaline W. L. Ngan, Man-Hong Leung, Davis C. T. Kwok, Vincent W. S. Liu, David W. Chan, Wai Y. Leung, Kwok-Ming Yao

Abstract

The forkhead box (FOX) M1 transcription factor is required to maintain the proliferation of cancer cells. Two transcriptionally active isoforms of FOXM1, FOXM1b and FOXM1c, have been identified, but their functional differences remain unclear. FOXM1c is distinguished from FOXM1b by an extra exon (exon Va) that contains an ERK1/2 target sequence. Based on a literature search and quantitative PCR analysis, we concluded that FOXM1b is the predominant isoform that is overexpressed in cancers. The further characterization of FOXM1b and FOXM1c revealed two interesting differences. First, FOXM1b exhibited a higher transforming ability than FOXM1c in a soft agar assay. Second, the transactivating activity of FOXM1c, but not that of FOXM1b, was sensitive to activation by RAF/MEK/MAPK signaling. Importantly, the MEK1 activation of FOXM1c was associated with proteolytic processing to generate short forms that might represent constitutively active forms missing the N-terminal inhibitory domain; in contrast, the proteolytic processing of FOXM1b did not require MEK1 activation. Our findings suggest that FOXM1b is functionally more active. These results provide novel insights into the regulation of FOXM1 activity and its role in tumorigenesis.

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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 4%
Unknown 22 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 39%
Student > Master 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Professor 1 4%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 13%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 39%
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 07 February 2013.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#6,609
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,791
of 288,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#110
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 288,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 328 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 60% of its contemporaries.