| Title |
Glioblastoma stem cells and stem cell-targeting immunotherapies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-015-1729-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rogelio Esparza, Tej D. Azad, Abdullah H. Feroze, Siddhartha S. Mitra, Samuel H. Cheshier |
| Abstract |
Advancements in immunotherapeutics promise new possibilities for the creation of glioblastoma (GBM) treatment options. Ongoing work in cancer stem cell biology has progressively elucidated the role of this tumor sub-population in oncogenesis and has distinguished them as prime therapeutic targets. Current clinical trials take a multifaceted approach with the intention of harnessing the intrinsic cytotoxic capabilities of the immune system to directly target glioblastoma cancer stem cells (gCSC) or indirectly disrupt their stromal microenvironment. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), dendritic cell (DC) vaccines, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies have emerged as the most common approaches, with particular iterations incorporating cancer stem cell antigenic markers in their treatment designs. Ongoing work to determine the comprehensive antigenic profile of the gCSC in conjunction with efforts to counter the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment holds much promise in future immunotherapeutic strategies against GBM. Given recent advancements in these fields, we believe there is tremendous potential to improve outcomes of GBM patients in the continuing evolution of immunotherapies targeted to cancer stem cell populations in GBM. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 15% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 32% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 5% |
| Engineering | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 11 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 24 February 2015.
All research outputs
#6,948,753
of 23,411,993 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#890
of 3,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,926
of 388,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#6
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,411,993 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,029 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 388,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 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 90% of its contemporaries.