↓ Skip to main content

Accurate quantification of T-cells expressing PD-1 in patients on anti-PD-1 immunotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Accurate quantification of T-cells expressing PD-1 in patients on anti-PD-1 immunotherapy
Published in
Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00262-018-2244-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Henning Zelba, Jonas Bochem, Graham Pawelec, Claus Garbe, Kilian Wistuba-Hamprecht, Benjamin Weide

Abstract

Increasing numbers of trials employing anti-PD-1 immunotherapy emphasize the requirement for predictive biomarkers of clinical response. Many studies examine the cell surface expression of PD-1 and other key regulators of T-cell activation and inhibition. Here, we compared common commercially available anti-PD-1 diagnostic antibodies and tested whether they can bind the PD-1 receptor in the presence of the therapeutic antagonists pembrolizumab and nivolumab. We observed that currently no antibodies are available that can reliably stain all PD-1 receptors on T-cells from patients treated with anti-PD-1 antibodies. Furthermore, none of the diagnostic antibodies detected the entire population of PD-1+ T-cells relative to indirect staining using the therapeutic antibodies themselves. To overcome this problem, here we present a reliable method for quantifying PD-1 expression on immune cells from treated patients which can be included in any conventional flow or mass cytometry antibody panel used for patient monitoring.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 10 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 17%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 12 18%
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 16 September 2018.
All research outputs
#7,753,975
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy
#1,064
of 2,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,823
of 338,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy
#13
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 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 2,948 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 338,532 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 65% of its contemporaries.