| Title |
Cerium oxide nanoparticles inhibit the migration and proliferation of gastric cancer by increasing DHX15 expression
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s103648 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yu-Feng Xiao, Jian-Mei Li, Su-Min Wang, Xin Yong, Bo Tang, Meng-Meng Jie, Hui Dong, Xiao-Chao Yang, Shi-Ming Yang |
| Abstract |
Gastric cancer is one of the leading causes of tumor-related deaths in the world. Current treatment options do not satisfy doctors and patients, and new therapies are therefore needed. Cerium oxide nanoparticles (CNPs) have been studied as a potential therapeutic approach for treating many diseases. However, their effects on human gastric cancer are currently unknown. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to characterize the effects of CNPs on human gastric cancer cell lines (MKN28 and BGC823). Gastric cancer cells were cocultured with different concentrations of CNPs, and proliferation and migration were measured both in vitro and in vivo. We found that CNPs inhibited the migration of gastric cancer cells when applied at different concentrations, but only a relatively high concentration (10 µg/mL) of CNPs suppressed proliferation. Furthermore, we found that CNPs increased the expression of DHX15 and its downstream signaling pathways. We therefore provide evidence showing that CNPs may be a promising approach to suppress malignant activity of gastric cancer by increasing the expression of DHX15. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 26% |
| Researcher | 5 | 19% |
| Professor | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 19% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
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 27 July 2016.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,887
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,989
of 367,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#65
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 367,263 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.