↓ Skip to main content

Neoepitopes as biomarkers of cartilage catabolism

Overview of attention for article published in Inflammation Research, June 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
7 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Neoepitopes as biomarkers of cartilage catabolism
Published in
Inflammation Research, June 2003
DOI 10.1007/s00011-003-1177-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. J. Fosang, H. Stanton, C. B. Little, L. M. Atley

Abstract

Progressive degradation of articular cartilage is a central feature of arthritis and a major determinant of long term joint dysfunction. There are no treatments able to halt the progression of cartilage destruction presently available, and monitoring the benefit of potential therapies is hampered by our inability to measure the "health" of articular cartilage. Serial radiographic assessment of joint space narrowing, the current gold standard, requires measurements over a prolonged time (1-5 years) and is prone to technical difficulties. Other strategies for evaluating cartilage degradation are needed to enable both short and long term monitoring of disease progression and response to therapy. One avenue that holds promise is the use of biomarkers that accurately reflect the degradative state of the articular cartilage. Antibodies that recognise terminal amino acid sequences generated by proteolysis at specific sites in the core protein of both aggrecan and type II collagen (neoepitope antibodies) have become available in recent years. These antibodies have been invaluable for identifying the proteinases responsible for cartilage breakdown both in vitro and in vivo. The presence of neoepitope sequences generated by specific metalloenzyme cleavage of aggrecan and type II collagen correlates well with the progression of cartilage degeneration, both in vitro and in mouse models of arthritis. Preliminary results with quantitative assays of type II collagen neoepitopes suggest that they may be useful markers of joint disease in humans. Long term studies correlating neoepitope concentration with clinical and radiographic disease are now required to validate the utility of neoepitopes as surrogate markers of cartilage degeneration and joint disease.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 26%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Professor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 21%
Engineering 2 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 2 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 August 2021.
All research outputs
#5,446,629
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Inflammation Research
#185
of 1,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,513
of 53,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Inflammation Research
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,448 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 80% 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 53,649 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them