↓ Skip to main content

The Elephant and the Blind Men: Making Sense of PARP Inhibitors in Homologous Recombination Deficient Tumor Cells

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 and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
180 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 Elephant and the Blind Men: Making Sense of PARP Inhibitors in Homologous Recombination Deficient Tumor Cells
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2013.00228
Pubmed ID
Authors

Silvana B. De Lorenzo, Anand G. Patel, Rachel M. Hurley, Scott H. Kaufmann

Abstract

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1) is an important component of the base excision repair (BER) pathway as well as a regulator of homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). Previous studies have demonstrated that treatment of HR-deficient cells with PARP inhibitors results in stalled and collapsed replication forks. Consequently, HR-deficient cells are extremely sensitive to PARP inhibitors. Several explanations have been advanced to explain this so-called synthetic lethality between HR deficiency and PARP inhibition: (i) reduction of BER activity leading to enhanced DNA double-strand breaks, which accumulate in the absence of HR; (ii) trapping of inhibited PARP1 at sites of DNA damage, which prevents access of other repair proteins; (iii) failure to initiate HR by poly(ADP-ribose) polymer-dependent BRCA1 recruitment; and (iv) activation of the NHEJ pathway, which selectively induces error-prone repair in HR-deficient cells. Here we review evidence regarding these various explanations for the ability of PARP inhibitors to selectively kill HR-deficient cancer cells and discuss their potential implications.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 179 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 19%
Researcher 30 17%
Student > Master 28 16%
Student > Bachelor 24 13%
Other 9 5%
Other 26 14%
Unknown 29 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 61 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 40 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 31 17%
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 27 February 2014.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#9,319
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,304
of 288,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#142
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 288,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.