↓ Skip to main content

Regulation of Mutant p53 Protein Expression

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Regulation of Mutant p53 Protein Expression
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2015.00284
Pubmed ID
Authors

Reshma Vijayakumaran, Kah Hin Tan, Panimaya Jeffreena Miranda, Sue Haupt, Ygal Haupt

Abstract

For several decades, p53 has been detected in cancer biopsies by virtue of its high protein expression level which is considered indicative of mutation. Surprisingly, however, mouse genetic studies revealed that mutant p53 is inherently labile, similar to its wild type (wt) counterpart. Consistently, in response to stress conditions, both wt and mutant p53 accumulate in cells. While wt p53 returns to basal level following recovery from stress, mutant p53 remains stable. In part, this can be explained in mutant p53-expressing cells by the lack of an auto-regulatory loop with Mdm2 and other negative regulators, which are pivotal for wt p53 regulation. Further, additional protective mechanisms are acquired by mutant p53, largely mediated by the co-chaperones and their paralogs, the stress-induced heat shock proteins. Consequently, mutant p53 is accumulated in cancer cells in response to chronic stress and this accumulation is critical for its oncogenic gain of functions (GOF). Building on the extensive knowledge regarding wt p53, the regulation of mutant p53 is unraveling. In this review, we describe the current understanding on the major levels at which mutant p53 is regulated. These include the regulation of p53 protein levels by microRNA and by enzymes controlling p53 proteasomal degradation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Unknown 130 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 20%
Student > Bachelor 20 15%
Student > Master 17 13%
Researcher 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 36 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 37 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 37 28%
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 22 March 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#8,025
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,721
of 380,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#39
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 58% 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 380,103 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 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.