↓ Skip to main content

Integrated EpCAM‐independent subtraction enrichment and iFISH strategies to detect and classify disseminated and circulating tumors cells

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Medicine, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Integrated EpCAM‐independent subtraction enrichment and iFISH strategies to detect and classify disseminated and circulating tumors cells
Published in
Clinical and Translational Medicine, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40169-015-0081-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Ping Lin

Abstract

Application of tumor cell surface adhesion molecule Anti-epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM)-dependent antibody capture, and intracellular cytokeratins (CKs)-dependent immunostaining strategies to detect disseminated or circulating tumor cells (DTCs or CTCs), is limited by highly heterogeneous and dynamic expression or absence of EpCAM and/or CKs in CTCs and DTCs, particularly in their capturing and identifying CTCs/DTCs shed from diverse types of solid tumor, thus being biased and restricted to the only both EpCAM and CK positive cancer cells. Moreover, heterogeneity of chromosome and tumor biomarker of CTCs/DTCs cannot be co-examined by conventional CK/EpCAM-dependent techniques. Accordingly, a novel integrated cellular and molecular approach of EpCAM-independent subtraction enrichment (SE) and immunostaining-FISH (iFISH(®)) has recently been successfully developed. SE-iFISH(®) is able to effectively enrich, comprehensively identify and characterize both large and small size non-hematopoietic heteroploid CTCs, DTCs and circulating tumor microemboli in various biofluid specimens of either cancer patients or patient-derived-xenograft mice. Obtained tumor cells, free of anti-EpCAM perturbing and hypotonic damage, are eligible for primary tumor cell culture as well as a series of downstream analyses. Highly heterogeneous CTCs and DTCs could be classified into subtypes by in situ phenotyping protein expression of various tumor biomarkers and karyotyping of chromosome aneuploidy performed by iFISH(®). Each CTC subtype may correlate with distinct clinical significance in terms of tumor metastasis, relapse, therapeutic drug sensitivity or resistance, respectively.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 54 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 19 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Engineering 3 5%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 20 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 January 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#752
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#294,987
of 399,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 399,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 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.