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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
New insights into the regulatory role of microRNA in tumor angiogenesis and clinical implications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Cancer, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12943-018-0766-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ye Wang, Liya Wang, Cheng Chen, Xiaoyuan Chu |
| Abstract |
Angiogenesis is essential for tumor growth and metastasis. Understanding the regulation of tumor angiogenesis has become increasingly important. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small noncoding RNAs that function in diverse biological processes via post-transcriptional regulation. Extensive studies have revealed two important regulatory roles of miRNAs in tumor angiogenesis: miRNAs in tumor cells affect the activity of endothelial cells via non-cell-autonomous mechanisms, and miRNAs in endothelial cells regulate the cell-autonomous behavior. Recent advances have further highlighted the role of tumor-derived extracellular vesicles in the regulation of tumor angiogenesis via transferring miRNAs to endothelial cells. In this review, we summarize the regulatory role of miRNA in tumor angiogenesis, with a highlight on clinical implications of miRNAs as biomarkers for anti-angiogenic therapy response, and as therapeutic interventions against tumor angiogenesis in vivo. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 27 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 16% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 29 | 38% |
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 22 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,492,327
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cancer
#1,053
of 1,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,484
of 437,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cancer
#30
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 437,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.