↓ Skip to main content

Drug Repositioning in Glioblastoma: A Pathway Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

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
Drug Repositioning in Glioblastoma: A Pathway Perspective
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2018.00218
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sze Kiat Tan, Anna Jermakowicz, Adnan K. Mookhtiar, Charles B. Nemeroff, Stephan C. Schürer, Nagi G. Ayad

Abstract

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most malignant primary adult brain tumor. The current standard of care is surgical resection, radiation, and chemotherapy treatment, which extends life in most cases. Unfortunately, tumor recurrence is nearly universal and patients with recurrent glioblastoma typically survive <1 year. Therefore, new therapies and therapeutic combinations need to be developed that can be quickly approved for use in patients. However, in order to gain approval, therapies need to be safe as well as effective. One possible means of attaining rapid approval is repurposing FDA approved compounds for GBM therapy. However, candidate compounds must be able to penetrate the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and therefore a selection process has to be implemented to identify such compounds that can eliminate GBM tumor expansion. We review here psychiatric and non-psychiatric compounds that may be effective in GBM, as well as potential drugs targeting cell death pathways. We also discuss the potential of data-driven computational approaches to identify compounds that induce cell death in GBM cells, enabled by large reference databases such as the Library of Integrated Network Cell Signatures (LINCS). Finally, we argue that identifying pathways dysregulated in GBM in a patient specific manner is essential for effective repurposing in GBM and other gliomas.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 %
Unknown 180 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 17%
Researcher 23 13%
Student > Master 21 12%
Student > Bachelor 21 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 22 12%
Unknown 56 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 16 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 7%
Neuroscience 11 6%
Other 31 17%
Unknown 59 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 18 January 2020.
All research outputs
#8,306,033
of 25,483,400 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#3,840
of 19,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,733
of 351,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#87
of 385 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,483,400 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,844 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 351,980 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 385 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.