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 |
Effects of the tropical ginger compound,1’-acetoxychavicol acetate, against tumor promotion in K5.Stat3C transgenic mice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-9966-31-57 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vinita Batra, Zanobia Syed, Jennifer N Gill, Malari A Coburn, Patrick Adegboyega, John DiGiovanni, J Michael Mathis, Runhua Shi, John L Clifford, Heather E Kleiner-Hancock |
| Abstract |
The purpose of the current study was to determine whether a tropical ginger derived compound 1'-acetoxychavicol acetate (ACA), suppresses skin tumor promotion in K5.Stat3C mice. In a two-week study in which wild-type (WT) and K5.Stat3C mice were co-treated with either vehicle, ACA, galanga extract, or fluocinolone acetonide (FA) and tetradecanoyl phorbol acetate (TPA), only the galanga extract and FA suppressed TPA-induced skin hyperproliferation and wet weight. None of these agents were effective at suppressing p-Tyr705Stat3 expression. However, ACA and FA showed promising inhibitory effects against skin tumorigenesis in K5.Stat3C mice. ACA also suppressed phospho-p65 NF-κB activation, suggesting a potential mechanism for its action. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| South Africa | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 16 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 22% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 28% |
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 23 June 2012.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research
#1,636
of 2,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,327
of 179,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,378 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 179,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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.