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 |
Optimisation of immunofluorescence methods to determine MCT1 and MCT4 expression in circulating tumour cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-015-1382-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephen Kershaw, Jeffrey Cummings, Karen Morris, Jonathan Tugwood, Caroline Dive |
| Abstract |
The monocarboxylate transporter-1 (MCT1) represents a novel target in rational anticancer drug design while AZD3965 was developed as an inhibitor of this transporter and is undergoing Phase I clinical trials ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01791595 ). We describe the optimisation of an immunofluorescence (IF) method for determination of MCT1 and MCT4 in circulating tumour cells (CTC) as potential prognostic and predictive biomarkers of AZD3965 in cancer patients. Antibody selectivity was investigated by western blotting (WB) in K562 and MDAMB231 cell lines acting as positive controls for MCT1 and MCT4 respectively and by flow cytometry also employing the control cell lines. Ability to detect MCT1 and MCT4 in CTC as a 4(th) channel marker utilising the Veridex(TM) CellSearch system was conducted in both human volunteer blood spiked with control cells and in samples collected from small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients. Experimental conditions were established which yielded a 10-fold dynamic range (DR) for detection of MCT1 over MCT4 (antibody concentration 6.25 μg/mL; integration time 0.4 s) and a 5-fold DR of MCT4 over MCT 1 (8 μg/100 μL and 0.8 s). The IF method was sufficiently sensitive to detect both MCT1 and MCT4 in CTCs harvested from cancer patients. The first IF method has been developed and optimised for detection of MCT 1 and MCT4 in cancer patient CTC. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 30% |
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 May 2015.
All research outputs
#17,756,606
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#4,958
of 8,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,350
of 263,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#140
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,297 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 263,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.