↓ Skip to main content

Gene expression and hypoxia in breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, August 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
170 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
Gene expression and hypoxia in breast cancer
Published in
Genome Medicine, August 2011
DOI 10.1186/gm271
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Favaro, Simon Lord, Adrian L Harris, Francesca M Buffa

Abstract

Hypoxia is a feature of most solid tumors and is associated with poor prognosis in several cancer types, including breast cancer. The master regulator of the hypoxic response is the Hypoxia-inducible factor 1α (HIF-1α). It is becoming clear that HIF-1α expression alone is not a reliable marker of tumor response to hypoxia, and recent studies have focused on determining gene and microRNA (miRNA) signatures for this complex process. The results of these studies are likely to pave the way towards the development of a robust hypoxia signature for breast and other cancers that will be useful for diagnosis and therapy. In this review, we outline the existing markers of hypoxia and recently identified gene and miRNA expression signatures, and discuss their potential as prognostic and predictive biomarkers. We also highlight how the hypoxia response is being targeted in the development of cancer therapies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Luxembourg 1 <1%
Unknown 164 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 23%
Student > Bachelor 29 17%
Researcher 25 15%
Student > Master 23 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 27 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 60 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 28 16%
Engineering 5 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Other 13 8%
Unknown 29 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 June 2017.
All research outputs
#7,960,512
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#1,216
of 1,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,664
of 134,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#11
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
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 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 134,836 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.