↓ Skip to main content

Is inhibition of kinase activity the only therapeutic strategy for LRRK2-associated Parkinson's disease?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Is inhibition of kinase activity the only therapeutic strategy for LRRK2-associated Parkinson's disease?
Published in
BMC Medicine, February 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-10-20
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iakov N Rudenko, Ruth Chia, Mark R Cookson

Abstract

Mutations in the leucine-rich repeat kinase 2 (LRRK2) gene are a common cause of familial Parkinson's disease (PD). Variation around the LRRK2 locus also contributes to the risk of sporadic PD. The LRRK2 protein contains a central catalytic region, and pathogenic mutations cluster in the Ras of complex protein C terminus of Ras of complex protein (mutations N1437H, R1441G/C and Y1699C) and kinase (G2019S and I2020T) domains. Much attention has been focused on the kinase domain, because kinase-dead versions of mutant LRRK2 are less toxic than kinase-active versions of the same proteins. Furthermore, kinase inhibitors may be able to mimic this effect in mouse models, although the currently tested inhibitors are not completely specific. In this review, we discuss the recent progress in the development of specific LRRK2 kinase inhibitors. We also discuss non-kinase-based therapeutic strategies for LRRK2-associated PD as it is possible that different approaches may be needed for different mutations.

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 77 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%
Denmark 1 1%
Unknown 74 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 22%
Researcher 16 21%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 11 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 12%
Neuroscience 7 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 8%
Chemistry 5 6%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 12 16%
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 25 February 2012.
All research outputs
#14,194,875
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,917
of 3,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,924
of 156,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#28
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 156,434 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 33 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.