You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
SELEX-Based Screening of Exosome-Tropic RNA
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1248/bpb.b17-00519 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Takuma Yamashita, Haruka Shinotsuka, Yuki Takahashi, Kana Kato, Makiya Nishikawa, Yoshinobu Takakura |
| Abstract |
Cell-derived nanosized vesicles or exosomes are expected to become delivery carriers for functional RNAs, such as small interfering RNA (siRNA). A method to efficiently load functional RNAs into exosomes is required for the development of exosome-based delivery carriers of functional RNAs. However, there is no method to find exosome-tropic exogenous RNA sequences. In this study, we used a systematic evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment (SELEX) method to screen exosome-tropic RNAs that can be used to load functional RNAs into exosomes by conjugation. Pooled single stranded 80-base RNAs, each of which contains a randomized 40-base sequence, were transfected into B16-BL6 murine melanoma cells and exosomes were collected from the cells. RNAs extracted from the exosomes were subjected to next round of SELEX. Cloning and sequencing of RNAs in SELEX-screened RNA pools showed that 29 of 56 clones had a typical RNA sequence. The sequence found by SELEX was enriched in exosomes after transfection to B16-BL6 cells. The results show that the SELEX-based method can be used for screening of exosome-tropic RNAs. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 35% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 3% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 13% |
| Engineering | 3 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 39% |
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 16 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,960,787
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin
#2,041
of 2,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,463
of 421,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin
#35
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,963 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 421,297 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 96 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 61% of its contemporaries.