↓ Skip to main content

Biological effects of cyclosporin A: A new antilymphocytic agent

Overview of attention for article published in Inflammation Research, July 1976
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
12 patents
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
1306 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Biological effects of cyclosporin A: A new antilymphocytic agent
Published in
Inflammation Research, July 1976
DOI 10.1007/bf01973261
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. F. Borel, Camille Feurer, H. U. Gubler, H. Stähelin

Abstract

The fungus metabolite cyclosporin A is a small peptide acting as a novel antilymphocytic agent. It strongly depressed appearance of both direct and indirect plaque-forming cells and produced a clear dose-dependent inhibition of haemagglutinin formation in mice upon oral administration. Skin graft rejection in mice and graft-versus-host disease in mice and rats were considerably delayed by cycloporin A which also prevented the occurrence of paralysis in rats with experimental allergic encephalomyelitis. This compound was not only highly effective in preventing development of Freund's adjuvant arthritis, but in addition improved the symptoms in rats with established arthritis, although it is inactive in acute inflammation. This new agent contrasts with other immunosuppressives and cytostatic drugs in its weak myelotoxicity. Experimental evidence suggests that cyclosporin A, rather than being cytostatic or lympholytic, affects an early stage of mitogenic triggering of the immunocompetent lymphoid cell.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 29 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 14%
Chemistry 10 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 32 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 June 2023.
All research outputs
#5,496,406
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Inflammation Research
#184
of 1,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#492
of 4,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Inflammation Research
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,481 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 4,648 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.