↓ Skip to main content

The bromodomain inhibitor N-methyl pyrrolidone reduced fat accumulation in an ovariectomized rat model

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epigenetics, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
The bromodomain inhibitor N-methyl pyrrolidone reduced fat accumulation in an ovariectomized rat model
Published in
Clinical Epigenetics, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13148-016-0209-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bebeka Gjoksi, Chafik Ghayor, Indranil Bhattacharya, Marcy Zenobi-Wong, Franz E. Weber

Abstract

Weight gain is one of the consequences of estrogen deficiency and constitutes a major health problem. The present study highlights the effects of N-methyl pyrrolidone (NMP) on adipogenesis in osteoporosis induced by estrogen deficiency in an ovariectomized rat model. Ovariectomy resulted in body weight gain, increased femoral marrow adipocytes, and hypertrophic adipocytes in white adipose tissue, distorted serum leptin, and TNF-α and PPARγ levels. Treatment with NMP normalized these parameters similar to the control group. In vitro, NMP inhibited the differentiation of 3T3-L1 pre-adipocytes and hMSCs, indicating its anti-adipogenic effect. Moreover, PPARγ was significantly reduced with NMP treatment in in vivo and in vitro experiments. NMP inhibited BRD2 and BRD4 binding in an AlphaScreen assay, with an IC50 of 3 and 4 mM, respectively. The effect of NMP was consistent with its role as a bromodomain inhibitor. Our data indicates that NMP inhibits the adipogenic effect of estrogen deficiency at the level of PPARγ expression by BRD4 inhibition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 18%
Researcher 3 18%
Professor 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 April 2016.
All research outputs
#14,258,962
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epigenetics
#743
of 1,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,987
of 298,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epigenetics
#29
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,257 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 298,997 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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.