↓ Skip to main content

Morphogen pathways as molecular targets for the treatment of fibrosis in systemic sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Dermatological Research, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Morphogen pathways as molecular targets for the treatment of fibrosis in systemic sclerosis
Published in
Archives of Dermatological Research, December 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00403-012-1304-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian Beyer, Clara Dees, Jörg H. W. Distler

Abstract

Wnt-, Hedgehog- and Notch-signaling cascades are morphogen pathways that play crucial roles in development and tissue homeostasis. While morphogen pathways are tightly regulated at multiple levels, inappropriate activation of Wnt, Hedgehog and Notch signaling has been implicated into the pathogenesis of various diseases. In particular, Wnt, Hedgehog and Notch signaling have emerged as central players in the pathogenesis of fibrotic diseases. Here, we will review the pro-fibrotic effects of Wnt, Hedgehog and Notch signaling in systemic sclerosis (SSc), prototypical systemic fibrotic disease. Wnt, Hedgehog and Notch pathways are activated in SSc. They potently stimulate fibroblasts to differentiate into myofibroblasts and to release collagen and other extracellular matrix components. Genetic or pharmacological inhibition of morphogen pathways effectively prevents experimental fibrosis in different preclinical models and induces regression of pre-established fibrosis. As several inhibitors of Wnt, Hedgehog and Notch have recently been developed with first ones being already approved for clinical trials, morphogen pathways maybe a novel approach for the treatment of fibrosis.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 8 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 10%
Neuroscience 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 July 2022.
All research outputs
#7,531,132
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Dermatological Research
#336
of 1,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,004
of 279,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Dermatological Research
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,330 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 279,195 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 54% of its contemporaries.