| Title |
Delivery of Exogenous miR-124 to Glioblastoma Multiform Cells by Wharton’s Jelly Mesenchymal Stem Cells Decreases Cell Proliferation and Migration, and Confers Chemosensitivity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12015-017-9788-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
S. Sharif, M. H. Ghahremani, M. Soleimani |
| Abstract |
MicroRNAs (miRs) are potential therapeutic targets in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), but the difficulties associated with their delivery to tumor target cells have hampered their widespread use. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) can migrate to the sites of cancers, including GBM and exert anti-tumor effects. In this study, it is shown that Wharton's jelly-MSCs (WJ-MSCs) have the ability to deliver exogenous miRs to GBM cells and the functional impact of this delivery is characterized. It is found that the labeled miR-124, as an example for miR of interest, can be successfully delivered with WJ-MSCs to U87 GBM cells via dependent or exosome-independent processes. It is demonstrated that the delivered exogenous miR-124 significantly decreases the luciferase activity of the target gene CDK6. In addition, the delivered miR-124 enhances the chemosensitivity of GBM cells to temozolomide and decreases the migration of GBM cells. These results suggest that the use of exogenous miRNA delivery with the derived exosomes from WJ-MSCs may provide a novel approach for miRNA replacement therapy in GBM cancers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 17% |
| Researcher | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 18 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 23 January 2020.
All research outputs
#5,242,603
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#197
of 1,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,175
of 446,708 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 446,708 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.