↓ Skip to main content

Transgenic rat models for mutagenesis and carcinogenesis

Overview of attention for article published in Genes and Environment, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Transgenic rat models for mutagenesis and carcinogenesis
Published in
Genes and Environment, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s41021-016-0072-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takehiko Nohmi, Kenichi Masumura, Naomi Toyoda-Hokaiwado

Abstract

Rats are a standard experimental animal for cancer bioassay and toxicological research for chemicals. Although the genetic analyses were behind mice, rats have been more frequently used for toxicological research than mice. This is partly because they live longer than mice and induce a wider variety of tumors, which are morphologically similar to those in humans. The body mass is larger than mice, which enables to take samples from organs for studies on pharmacokinetics or toxicokinetics. In addition, there are a number of chemicals that exhibit marked species differences in the carcinogenicity. These compounds are carcinogenic in rats but not in mice. Such examples are aflatoxin B1 and tamoxifen, both are carcinogenic to humans. Therefore, negative mutagenic/carcinogenic responses in mice do not guarantee that the chemical is not mutagenic/carcinogenic to rats or perhaps to humans. To facilitate research on in vivo mutagenesis and carcinogenesis, several transgenic rat models have been established. In general, the transgenic rats for mutagenesis are treated with chemicals longer than transgenic mice for more exact examination of the relationship between mutagenesis and carcinogenesis. Transgenic rat models for carcinogenesis are engineered mostly to understand mechanisms underlying chemical carcinogenesis. Here, we review papers dealing with the transgenic rat models for mutagenesis and carcinogenesis, and discuss the future perspective.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Lecturer 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 12 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 6%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 11 31%

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 08 February 2017.
All research outputs
#10,768,046
of 13,535,089 outputs
Outputs from Genes and Environment
#36
of 62 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,066
of 347,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genes and Environment
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,535,089 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 62 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 347,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.