| Title |
Clinical significance of T cell metabolic reprogramming in cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Medicine, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40169-016-0110-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christoph Herbel, Nikolaos Patsoukis, Kankana Bardhan, Pankaj Seth, Jessica D. Weaver, Vassiliki A. Boussiotis |
| Abstract |
Conversion of normal cells to cancer is accompanied with changes in their metabolism. During this conversion, cell metabolism undergoes a shift from oxidative phosphorylation to aerobic glycolysis, also known as Warburg effect, which is a hallmark for cancer cell metabolism. In cancer cells, glycolysis functions in parallel with the TCA cycle and other metabolic pathways to enhance biosynthetic processes and thus support proliferation and growth. Similar metabolic features are observed in T cells during activation but, in contrast to cancer, metabolic transitions in T cells are part of a physiological process. Currently, there is intense interest in understanding the cause and effect relationship between metabolic reprogramming and T cell differentiation. After the recent success of cancer immunotherapy, the crosstalk between immune system and cancer has come to the forefront of clinical and basic research. One of the key goals is to delineate how metabolic alterations of cancer influence metabolism-regulated function and differentiation of tumor resident T cells and how such effects might be altered by immunotherapy. Here, we review the unique metabolic features of cancer, the implications of cancer metabolism on T cell metabolic reprogramming during antigen encounters, and the translational prospective of harnessing metabolism in cancer and T cells for cancer therapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 111 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 22% |
| Researcher | 19 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 13% |
| Unknown | 22 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 25 | 22% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 20 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 27 | 23% |
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 28 February 2018.
All research outputs
#16,045,990
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#491
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,966
of 371,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#12
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 371,382 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.