| Title |
Up-regulation of NKG2A inhibitory receptor on circulating NK cells contributes to transfusion-induced immunodepression in patients with β-thalassemia major
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Medical Science, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11596-016-1616-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yong Zou, Zhi-xing Song, Ying Lu, Xiao-li Liang, Qing Yuan, Si-hong Liao, Jun-jie Bao |
| Abstract |
Accumulating evidence has shown that allogeneic blood transfusions can induce significant immunosuppression in recipients, and thereby increase the risk of postoperative infection and/or tumor relapse. Although it is well known that natural killer (NK) cells are responsible for the immunodepression effects of transfusion, the underlying mechanisms remain obscure. In this study, we investigated the role of NK cells in transfusion-induced immunodepression in β-thalassemia major. The proportion of circulating NK cells and the expression of NK receptors (NKG2A, CD158a, NKP30, NKP46 and NKG2D) as well as CD107a were detected by multicolor flow cytometry. IFN-γ production by circulating NK cells was detected by intracellular cytokine staining. Our results showed that the proportion and cytotoxicity (CD107a expression) of circulating NK cells in transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia major patients were remarkably lower than those of β-thalassemia minor patients or healthy volunteers. Expression of NKG2A inhibitory receptor on circulating NK cells in patients with β-thalassemia major was remarkably up-regulated, but there were no significant differences in the expression levels of NKP30, NKP46, NKG2D, CD158a and IFN-γ. These results indicate NKG2A inhibitory receptor may play a key role in transfusion-induced immunodepression of NK cells in patients with β-thalassemia major. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 8% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 31% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 54% |
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 04 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Current Medical Science
#409
of 719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#298,216
of 380,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Medical Science
#11
of 22 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 719 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 380,145 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.