| Title |
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells for Disease Modeling and Drug Discovery in Neurodegenerative Diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Neurobiology, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12035-014-8867-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lei Cao, Lan Tan, Teng Jiang, Xi-Chen Zhu, Jin-Tai Yu |
| Abstract |
Although most neurodegenerative diseases have been closely related to aberrant accumulation of aggregation-prone proteins in neurons, understanding their pathogenesis remains incomplete, and there is no treatment to delay the onset or slow the progression of many neurodegenerative diseases. The availability of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) in recapitulating the phenotypes of several late-onset neurodegenerative diseases marks the new era in in vitro modeling. The iPSC collection represents a unique and well-characterized resource to elucidate disease mechanisms in these diseases and provides a novel human stem cell platform for screening new candidate therapeutics. Modeling human diseases using iPSCs has created novel opportunities for both mechanistic studies as well as for the discovery of new disease therapies. In this review, we introduce iPSC-based disease modeling in neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. In addition, we discuss the implementation of iPSCs in drug discovery associated with some new techniques. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 117 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 20% |
| Researcher | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 13% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 30 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 25 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 15 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 19 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 18 August 2015.
All research outputs
#3,058,831
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Neurobiology
#540
of 3,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,813
of 235,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Neurobiology
#2
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,436 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 235,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.