↓ Skip to main content

Relevance of matrix metalloproteases in non-small cell lung cancer diagnosis

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

Mentioned by

reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Relevance of matrix metalloproteases in non-small cell lung cancer diagnosis
Published in
BMC Cancer, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12885-017-3842-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonia Blanco-Prieto, Leticia Barcia-Castro, María Páez de la Cadena, Francisco Javier Rodríguez-Berrocal, Lorena Vázquez-Iglesias, María Isabel Botana-Rial, Alberto Fernández-Villar, Loretta De Chiara

Abstract

The need for novel biomarkers that could aid in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) detection, together with the relevance of Matrix Metalloproteases (MMPs) -1, -2, -7, -9 and -10 in lung tumorigenesis, prompted us to assess the diagnostic usefulness of these MMPs and the Tissue Inhibitor of Metalloproteinase (TIMP) -1 in NSCLC patients. Markers were evaluated in an initial study cohort (19 NSCLC cases and 19 healthy controls). Those that better performed were analyzed in a larger sample including patients with benign lung diseases. Serum MMPs and TIMP-1 were determined by multiplexed immunoassays. Logistic regression was employed for multivariate analysis of biomarker combinations. MMPs and TIMP-1 were elevated in the serum of NSCLC patients compared to healthy controls. MMP-1, -7 and -9 performed at best and were further evaluated in the sample including benign pathologies, corroborating the superiority of MMP-9 in NSCLC discrimination, also at early-stage NSCLC. The optimal diagnostic value was obtained with the model including MMP-9, gender, age and smoking history, that demonstrated an AUC of 0.787, 85.54% sensitivity and 64.89% specificity. Our results suggest that MMP-9 is a potential biomarker for NSCLC diagnosis and its combined measurement with other biomarkers could improve NSCLC detection.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 3 6%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 14 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 9%
Engineering 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 13 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 December 2017.
All research outputs
#20,454,971
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#6,529
of 8,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#374,692
of 439,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#143
of 179 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 439,586 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 179 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.