| Title |
Stem Cell-Derived Exosomes, Autophagy, Extracellular Matrix Turnover, and miRNAs in Cardiac Regeneration during Stem Cell Therapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12015-016-9696-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Priyanka Prathipati, Shyam Sundar Nandi, Paras Kumar Mishra |
| Abstract |
Stem cell therapy (SCT) raises the hope for cardiac regeneration in ischemic hearts. However, underlying molecular mechanisms for repair of dead myocardium by SCT in the ischemic heart is poorly understood. Growing evidences suggest that cardiac matrix stiffness and differential expressions of miRNAs play a crucial role in stem cell survival and differentiation. However, their roles on transplanted stem cells, for myocardial repair of the ischemic heart, remain unclear. Transplanted stem cells may act in an autocrine and/or paracrine manner to regenerate the dead myocardium. Paracrine mediators such as stem cell-derived exosomes are emerging as a novel therapeutic strategy to overcome some of the limitations of SCT. These exosomes carry microRNAs (miRNAs) that may regulate stem cell differentiation into a specific lineage. MicroRNAs may also contribute to stiffness of surrounding matrix by regulating extracellular matrix (ECM) turnover. The survival of transplanted stem cell depends on its autophagic process that maintains cellular homeostasis. Therefore, exosomes, miRNAs, extracellular matrix turnover, and autophagy may have an integral role in improving the efficacy of SCT. This review elaborates the specific roles of these regulatory components on cardiac regeneration in the ischemic heart during SCT. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 87 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 27% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Researcher | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 15 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 22% |
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 13 November 2016.
All research outputs
#16,580,157
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#643
of 1,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,030
of 317,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#11
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 1,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 317,131 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 16 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.