| Title |
Expression patterns of immune genes in long-term cultured dental stem cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Oral Investigations, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00784-015-1497-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pukana Jayaraman, Vijayendran Govindasamy, Nareshwaran Gnanasegaran, Wijenthiran Kunasekaran, Punitha Vasanthan, Sabri Musa, Noor Hayaty Abu Kasim |
| Abstract |
Long-term culture system is used to prevent the impediment of insufficient cells and is good for low starting materials such as dental pulp or periodontal ligament. In general, although cell viability and functionality are the most common aspects taken into consideration in culturing cells for a long term, they may not truly represent the biological state of the cells. Hence, we explored the behaviour of another important aspect which is the immune properties in long-term cultured cells. Dental pulp stem cells from deciduous (SHED; n = 3) and permanent (DPSCs; n = 3) teeth as well as periodontal ligament stem cells (PDLSCs; n = 3) were cultured under identical culture condition. The immune properties of each cell lines were profiled at passage 2 [P2] and passage 9 [P9] as early and late passages, respectively. This was further validated at the protein level using the Luminex platform. A major shift of genes was noticed at P9 with SHED being the highest. SHED cultured at P9 displayed many genes representing pathogen recognition (P < 0.001), immune signalling (P < 0.001, pro-inflammatory (P < 0.001), anti-inflammatory (P < 0.001) and immune-related growth and stimulation factor (P < 0.001) as compared to DPSCs and PDLSCs. Surprisingly, SHED also expressed many cytotoxicity genes (P < 0.001). Communally, instabilities of immune genes from our findings suggest that long-term cultured cells may not be feasible for transplantation purposes. A complete biological characterization covering all major aspects including immune properties should be made as prerequisite criteria prior to the use of long-term cultured stem cells in clinical settings. |
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 States | 1 | 50% |
| India | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 29 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 9 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 13% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 26% |
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 09 June 2015.
All research outputs
#14,227,016
of 22,808,725 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Oral Investigations
#518
of 1,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,199
of 266,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Oral Investigations
#12
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,808,725 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,402 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 266,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 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 50% of its contemporaries.