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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
PIM-1 contributes to the malignancy of pancreatic cancer and displays diagnostic and prognostic value
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13046-016-0406-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jianwei Xu, Guangbing Xiong, Zhe Cao, Hua Huang, Tianxiao Wang, Lei You, Li Zhou, Lianfang Zheng, Ya Hu, Taiping Zhang, Yupei Zhao |
| Abstract |
The effects of PIM-1 on the progression of pancreatic cancer remain unclear, and the prognostic value of PIM-1 levels in tissues is controversial. Additionally, the expression levels and clinical value of PIM-1 in plasma have not been reported. The effects of PIM-1 on biological behaviours were analysed. PIM-1 levels in tissues and plasma were detected, and the clinical value was evaluated. We found that PIM-1 knockdown in pancreatic cancer cells suppressed proliferation, induced cell cycle arrest, enhanced apoptosis, resensitized cells to gemcitabine and erlotinib treatment, and inhibited ABCG2 and EZH2 mRNA expression. Our results indicated that PIM-1 and the EGFR pathway formed a positive feedback loop. We also found that PIM-1 expression in pancreatic cancer tissues was significantly upregulated and that a high level of expression was negatively associated with prognosis (P = 0.025, hazard ratio [HR] =2.113, 95 % confidence interval: 1.046-4.266). Additionally, we found that plasma PIM-1 levels in patients with pancreatic cancer were significantly increased and could be used in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. High plasma PIM-1 expression was an independent adverse prognostic factor for pancreatic cancer (P = 0.037, HR = 1.87, 95 % CI: 1.04-3.35). Our study suggests that PIM-1 contributes to malignancy and has diagnostic and prognostic value in pancreatic cancer. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 21% |
| Researcher | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 21% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 09 June 2023.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research
#574
of 2,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,522
of 346,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research
#6
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,379 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 346,175 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 73% of its contemporaries.