↓ Skip to main content

A synergistic antiproliferation effect of curcumin and docosahexaenoic acid in SK-BR-3 breast cancer cells: unique signaling not explained by the effects of either compound alone

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, April 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 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
A synergistic antiproliferation effect of curcumin and docosahexaenoic acid in SK-BR-3 breast cancer cells: unique signaling not explained by the effects of either compound alone
Published in
BMC Cancer, April 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-11-149
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey D Altenburg, Andrew A Bieberich, Colin Terry, Kevin A Harvey, Justin F VanHorn, Zhidong Xu, V Jo Davisson, Rafat A Siddiqui

Abstract

Breast cancer is a collection of diseases in which molecular phenotypes can act as both indicators and mediators of therapeutic strategy. Therefore, candidate therapeutics must be assessed in the context of multiple cell lines with known molecular phenotypes. Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and curcumin (CCM) are dietary compounds known to antagonize breast cancer cell proliferation. We report that these compounds in combination exert a variable antiproliferative effect across multiple breast cell lines, which is synergistic in SK-BR-3 cells and triggers cell signaling events not predicted by the activity of either compound alone.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 100 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 27 26%
Unknown 18 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 31%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 8%
Engineering 6 6%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 26 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 17 May 2023.
All research outputs
#2,086,372
of 23,779,713 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#349
of 8,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,958
of 111,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#2
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,779,713 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,464 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
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 111,229 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.