↓ Skip to main content

Differences in TGF-β1 signaling and clinicopathologic characteristics of histologic subtypes of gastric cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Differences in TGF-β1 signaling and clinicopathologic characteristics of histologic subtypes of gastric cancer
Published in
BMC Cancer, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2091-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kyung Ho Pak, Dong Hoon Kim, Hyunki Kim, Do Hyung Lee, Jae-Ho Cheong

Abstract

Aberrant TGF-β1 signaling is suggested to be involved in gastric carcinogenesis. However, the role of TGF-β1 in intestinal-type [i-GC] and diffuse-type [d-GC] gastric cancer remains largely unknown. In this study, we evaluated the expression of TGF-β1 signaling molecules and compared the clinicopathological features of i-GC and d-GC. Patients (n=365, consecutive) who underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in 2005 were enrolled. We performed immunohistochemical staining of TGF-β1, TGF-β1 receptor-2 (TβR2), Smad4, p-ERK1/2, TGF-activated kinase (TAK)1, and p-Akt in 68 paraffin-embedded tumor blocks (33 i-GC and 35 d-GC), scored the expression according to the extent of staining, and evaluated differences between the histologic subtypes. Patients with d-GC differed from those with i-GC as follows: younger and more likely to be female; more aggressive stage; higher recurrence rate. The expression of TGF-β1 and TβR2 was higher in i-GC (P = 0.05 and P <0.001, respectively). The expression of Smad4, a representative molecule of the Smad-dependent pathway, was decreased in both subtypes. TAK1 and p-Akt, two major molecules involved in the Smad-independent pathway, were over-expressed (69 ~ 87 % of cases stained), without a statistically significant difference between i-GC and d-GC. Of note, the expression of p-ERK1/2, a Smad-independent pathway, was significantly increased in i-GC (P = 0.008). The clinicopathological characteristics vary in different histologic gastric cancer subtypes. Although TGF-β1 signaling in gastric cancer cells appears hyper-activated in i-GC compared to d-GC, the Smad-dependent pathway seems down-regulated while the Smad-independent pathway seems up-regulated in both histologic subtypes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 25%
Professor 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Researcher 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Computer Science 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 25%

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 06 February 2016.
All research outputs
#5,333,029
of 7,108,255 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#2,056
of 3,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,728
of 319,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#104
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,108,255 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,198 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 319,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.