| Title |
Activated CD4+ and CD8+ T Cell Proportions in Multiple Sclerosis Patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Inflammation, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10753-016-0441-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Borros Arneth |
| Abstract |
The goal of this study was to trace the course of multiple sclerosis (MS) by evaluating the lymphocyte subpopulation counts and the levels of CD4+ and CD8+ T cell activation using flow cytometry. Samples obtained from healthy subjects (N = 40) and patients with MS (N = 290) were analyzed. Lymphocytes were labeled for the surface markers CD4+, CD8+, CD3+, CD16+, CD19+, CD45+, and CD53+ and the activation marker HLA-DR+. Cell counts were then determined using flow cytometry. A high degree of inter-individual variability was observed in the counts of all lymphocyte subtypes in the MS group. A significantly lower proportion of CD3+ T cells (69 ± 14 % in healthy subjects and 60 ± 17 % as a percent of total lymphocytes in MS patients), CD4+ T cells (41 ± 11 and 28 ± 18 %, respectively), and a significantly higher proportion of NK T cells (12 ± 5 and 25 ± 21 %, respectively) were observed in patients with MS than in healthy subjects. These differences led to a lowered CD4+/CD8+ T cell ratio. Furthermore, a significantly lower proportion of activated CD4+ T cells (HLA-DR+ CD4+; from 48 ± 10 to 38 ± 15 % as a percent of CD4+ cells) was observed in patients with MS than in healthy subjects. The high level of inter-individual variability in lymphocyte cell counts and the counts of activated T cells suggest that MS is a complex and heterogeneous disease. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 17% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 22% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 13% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 13% |
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 05 April 2017.
All research outputs
#14,271,203
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Inflammation
#415
of 1,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,715
of 335,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Inflammation
#9
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,053 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
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 335,711 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.