↓ Skip to main content

Key Players in Choline Metabolic Reprograming in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Key Players in Choline Metabolic Reprograming in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2016.00205
Pubmed ID
Authors

Egidio Iorio, Maria José Caramujo, Serena Cecchetti, Francesca Spadaro, Giulia Carpinelli, Rossella Canese, Franca Podo

Abstract

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), defined as lack of estrogen and progesterone receptors in the absence of protein overexpression/gene amplification of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, is still a clinical challenge despite progress in breast cancer care. (1)H magnetic resonance spectroscopy allows identification and non-invasive monitoring of TNBC metabolic aberrations and elucidation of some key mechanisms underlying tumor progression. Thus, it has the potential to improve in vivo diagnosis and follow-up and also to identify new targets for treatment. Several studies have shown an altered phosphatidylcholine (PtdCho) metabolism in TNBCs, both in patients and in experimental models. Upregulation of choline kinase-alpha, an enzyme of the Kennedy pathway that phosphorylates free choline (Cho) to phosphocholine (PCho), is a major contributor to the increased PCho content detected in TNBCs. Phospholipase-mediated PtdCho headgroup hydrolysis also contributes to the build-up of a PCho pool in TNBC cells. The oncogene-driven PtdCho cycle appears to be fine tuned in TNBC cells in at least three ways: by modulating the choline import, by regulating the activity or expression of specific metabolic enzymes, and by contributing to the rewiring of the entire metabolic network. Thus, only by thoroughly dissecting these mechanisms, it will be possible to effectively translate this basic knowledge into further development and implementation of Cho-based imaging techniques and novel classes of therapeutics.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 22%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Chemistry 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 15 31%
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 30 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,313
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,940
of 330,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#31
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 330,680 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.