↓ Skip to main content

Intra-tumor heterogeneity: lessons from microbial evolution and clinical implications

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Intra-tumor heterogeneity: lessons from microbial evolution and clinical implications
Published in
Genome Medicine, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/gm505
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elza C de Bruin, Tiffany B Taylor, Charles Swanton

Abstract

Multiple subclonal populations of tumor cells can coexist within the same tumor. This intra-tumor heterogeneity will have clinical implications and it is therefore important to identify factors that drive or suppress such heterogeneous tumor progression. Evolutionary biology can provide important insights into this process. In particular, experimental evolution studies of microbial populations, which exist as clonal populations that can diversify into multiple subclones, have revealed important evolutionary processes driving heterogeneity within a population. There are transferrable lessons that can be learnt from these studies that will help us to understand the process of intra-tumor heterogeneity in the clinical setting. In this review, we summarize drivers of microbial diversity that have been identified, such as mutation rate and environmental influences, and discuss how knowledge gained from microbial experimental evolution studies may guide us to identify and understand important selective factors that promote intra-tumor heterogeneity. Furthermore, we discuss how these factors could be used to direct and optimize research efforts to improve patient care, focusing on therapeutic resistance. Finally, we emphasize the need for longitudinal studies to address the impact of these potential tumor heterogeneity-promoting factors on drug resistance, metastatic potential and clinical outcome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Belgium 2 2%
Switzerland 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Korea, Republic of 1 1%
Unknown 73 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 19%
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 6 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 35 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 12%
Computer Science 2 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 6 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 September 2014.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#1,401
of 1,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,818
of 315,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#22
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 315,290 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.