↓ Skip to main content

Factors involved in cancer metastasis: a better understanding to “seed and soil” hypothesis

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cancer, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
147 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
290 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
Factors involved in cancer metastasis: a better understanding to “seed and soil” hypothesis
Published in
Molecular Cancer, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12943-017-0742-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qiang Liu, Hongfei Zhang, Xiaoli Jiang, Caiyun Qian, Zhuoqi Liu, Daya Luo

Abstract

Metastasis has intrigued researchers for more than 100 years. Despite the development of technologies and therapeutic strategies, metastasis is still the major cause of cancer-related death until today. The famous "seed and soil" hypothesis is widely cited and accepted, and it still provides significant instructions in cancer research until today. To our knowledge, there are few reviews that comprehensively and correlatively focus on both the seed and soil factors involved in cancer metastasis; moreover, despite the fact that increasingly underlying mechanisms and concepts have been defined recently, previous perspectives are appealing but may be limited. Hence, we reviewed factors involved in cancer metastasis, including both seed and soil factors. By integrating new concepts with the classic hypothesis, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the "seed and soil" hypothesis and to conceptualize the framework for understanding factors involved in cancer metastasis. Based on a dynamic overview of this field, we also discuss potential implications for future research and clinical therapeutic strategies.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 290 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 290 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 64 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 14%
Researcher 31 11%
Student > Master 24 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 7%
Other 31 11%
Unknown 78 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 79 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 55 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 3%
Other 35 12%
Unknown 94 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 03 January 2020.
All research outputs
#4,660,635
of 18,552,435 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cancer
#253
of 1,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,130
of 424,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cancer
#14
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,552,435 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,422 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 424,862 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.