| Title |
Epithelial Mesenchymal Transition: a double‐edged sword
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Translational Medicine, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40169-015-0055-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guislaine Barriere, Pietro Fici, Giulia Gallerani, Francesco Fabbri, Michel Rigaud |
| Abstract |
Epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT) is a physiological process necessary to normal embryologic development. However in genesis of pathological situations, this transition can be perverted and signaling pathways have different regulations from those of normal physiology. In cancer invasion, such a mechanism leads to generation of circulating tumor cells. Epithelial cancer cells become motile mesenchymal cells able to shed from the primary tumor and enter in the blood circulation. This is the major part of the invasive way of cancer. EMT is also implicated in chronic diseases like fibrosis and particularly renal fibrosis. In adult organisms, healing is based on EMT which is beneficial to repair wounds even if it can sometimes exceed its goal and elicit fibrosis. In this review, we delineate the clinical significance of EMT in both physiological and pathological circumstances. |
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 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 150 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 13% |
| Researcher | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 15% |
| Unknown | 26 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 42 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 4% |
| Engineering | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 35 | 23% |
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 06 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#752
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,355
of 279,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#5
of 7 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 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 is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 279,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.