↓ Skip to main content

Epigenetic modifications of the VGF gene in human non-small cell lung cancer tissues pave the way towards enhanced expression

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epigenetics, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Epigenetic modifications of the VGF gene in human non-small cell lung cancer tissues pave the way towards enhanced expression
Published in
Clinical Epigenetics, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13148-017-0423-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian Marwitz, Lena Heinbockel, Swetlana Scheufele, Dörte Nitschkowski, Christian Kugler, Sven Perner, Martin Reck, Ole Ammerpohl, Torsten Goldmann

Abstract

Hwang et al. recently showed that VGF substantially contributes to the resistance of human lung cancer cells towards epidermal growth factor receptor kinase inhibitors. This was further linked to enhanced epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Here, we demonstrate that VGF is epigenetically modified in non-small cell lung cancer tissues compared to corresponding tumor-free lung tissues from the same donors by using methylome bead chip analyses. These epigenetic modifications trigger an increased transcription of the VGF gene within the tumors, which then leads to an increased expression of the protein, facilitating epithelial-mesenchymal transition, and the resistance to kinase inhibitors. These results should be taken into account in the design of novel therapeutic and diagnostic approaches.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 33%
Student > Postgraduate 1 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Unknown 4 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Neuroscience 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 44%
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 07 December 2017.
All research outputs
#13,573,826
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epigenetics
#677
of 1,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,053
of 438,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epigenetics
#12
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 438,539 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 50% of its contemporaries.