↓ Skip to main content

RNAi screens for Rho GTPase regulators of cell shape and YAP/TAZ localisation in triple negative breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Data, March 2017
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 (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
RNAi screens for Rho GTPase regulators of cell shape and YAP/TAZ localisation in triple negative breast cancer
Published in
Scientific Data, March 2017
DOI 10.1038/sdata.2017.18
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricia Pascual-Vargas, Samuel Cooper, Julia Sero, Vicky Bousgouni, Mar Arias-Garcia, Chris Bakal

Abstract

In order to metastasise, triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) must make dynamic changes in cell shape. The shape of all eukaryotic cells is regulated by Rho Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factors (RhoGEFs), which activate Rho-family GTPases in response to mechanical and informational cues. In contrast, Rho GTPase-activating proteins (RhoGAPs) inhibit Rho GTPases. However, which RhoGEFs and RhoGAPS couple TNBC cell shape to changes in their environment is very poorly understood. Moreover, whether the activity of particular RhoGEFs and RhoGAPs become dysregulated as cells evolve the ability to metastasise is not clear. Towards the ultimate goal of identifying RhoGEFs and RhoGAPs that are essential for TNBC metastasis, we performed an RNAi screen to isolate RhoGEFs and RhoGAPs that contribute to the morphogenesis of the highly metastatic TNBC cell line LM2, and its less-metastatic parental cell line MDA-MB-231. For ~6 million cells from each cell line, we measured 127 different features following the depletion of 142 genes. Using a linear classifier scheme we also describe the morphological heterogeneity of each gene-depleted population.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 tweeters 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Lecturer 3 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 20%
Engineering 6 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 13 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 May 2020.
All research outputs
#1,373,129
of 17,814,645 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Data
#491
of 1,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,048
of 269,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Data
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,814,645 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,619 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 269,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them