| Title |
Diet-related DNA adduct formation in relation to carcinogenesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Reviews, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1093/nutrit/nuw017 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lieselot Y Hemeryck, Lynn Vanhaecke |
| Abstract |
The human diet contributes significantly to the initiation and promotion of carcinogenesis. It has become clear that the human diet contains several groups of natural foodborne chemicals that are at least in part responsible for the genotoxic, mutagenic, and carcinogenic potential of certain foodstuffs. Electrophilic chemicals are prone to attack nucleophilic sites in DNA, resulting in the formation of altered nucleobases, also known as DNA adducts. Since DNA adduct formation is believed to signal the onset of chemically induced carcinogenesis, the DNA adduct-inducing potential of certain foodstuffs has been investigated to gain more insight into diet-related pathways of carcinogenesis. Many studies have investigated diet-related DNA adduct formation. This review summarizes work on known or suspected dietary carcinogens and the role of DNA adduct formation in hypothesized carcinogenesis pathways. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 18 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#13,903,378
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Reviews
#1,559
of 1,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,333
of 355,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Reviews
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,944 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.2. 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 355,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.