↓ Skip to main content

Synthetic lethality in lung cancer and translation to clinical therapies

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cancer, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 1,725)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Synthetic lethality in lung cancer and translation to clinical therapies
Published in
Molecular Cancer, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12943-016-0546-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ada W. Y. Leung, Tanya de Silva, Marcel B. Bally, William W. Lockwood

Abstract

Lung cancer is a heterogeneous disease consisting of multiple histological subtypes each driven by unique genetic alterations. Despite the development of targeted therapies that inhibit the oncogenic mutations driving a subset of lung cancer cases, there is a paucity of effective treatments for the majority of lung cancer patients and new strategies are urgently needed. In recent years, the concept of synthetic lethality has been established as an effective approach for discovering novel cancer-specific targets as well as a method to improve the efficacy of existing drugs which provide partial but insufficient benefits for patients. In this review, we discuss the concept of synthetic lethality, the various types of synthetic lethal interactions in the context of oncology and the approaches used to identify these interactions, including recent advances that have transformed the ability to discover novel synthetic lethal combinations on a global scale. Lastly, we describe the specific synthetic lethal interactions identified in lung cancer to date and explore the pharmacological challenges and considerations in translating these discoveries to the clinic.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Qatar 1 1%
Unknown 88 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 26%
Student > Master 13 14%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Other 5 5%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 17 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 17 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 10 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,054,274
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cancer
#39
of 1,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,100
of 322,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cancer
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 322,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.