↓ Skip to main content

De novo CD5-positive diffuse large B-cell lymphomas show high specificity for cyclin D2 expression

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic Pathology, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 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
De novo CD5-positive diffuse large B-cell lymphomas show high specificity for cyclin D2 expression
Published in
Diagnostic Pathology, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1746-1596-8-81
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takuro Igawa, Yasuharu Sato, Katsuyoshi Takata, Noriko Iwaki, Takehiro Tanaka, Naoko Asano, Yoshinobu Maeda, Yorihisa Orita, Naoya Nakamura, Shigeo Nakamura, Tadashi Yoshino

Abstract

D cyclins positively regulate the cell cycle and mediate the pathogenesis of some lymphomas. Cyclin D1 overexpression is the hallmark of mantle cell lymphoma, whereas cyclins D2 and D3 are reportedly not as specific to certain lymphomas as cyclin D1. In this study, cyclin D2 was found to be overexpressed in 98% of de novo CD5-positive diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCLs) (50/51) and in 28% of CD5-negative DLBCLs (14/51). A statistically significant difference was observed between these two groups (p<0.0001). In contrast, no statistical difference was found in the cyclin D3 expression between CD5-positive (18/51) and CD5-negative (24/51) DLBCLs (p=0.23). Based on these findings, cyclin D2 is therefore considered to be closely associated with de novo CD5-positive DLBCLs. This insight may be useful for overcoming the inferior survival of this aggressive lymphoma.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 10%
Unknown 9 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 40%
Other 2 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 10%
Student > Master 1 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 10%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 20%
Unknown 3 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 May 2013.
All research outputs
#13,152,593
of 22,710,079 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#329
of 1,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,775
of 194,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#7
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,710,079 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,120 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 194,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 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.