| Title |
Risks, Benefits, and Therapeutic Potential of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Autoimmune Diabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Diabetes Reports, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11892-012-0309-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carlos Eduardo Barra Couri, Maria Carolina de Oliveira, Belinda Pinto Simões |
| Abstract |
Type 1 diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease that results from the autoimmune response against pancreatic insulin producing β cells. Apart of several insulin regimens, since the decade of 80s various immunomodulatory regimens were tested aiming at blocking some steps of the autoimmune process against β cell mass and at promoting β cell preservation. In the last years, some independent research groups tried to cure type 1 diabetes with an "immunologic reset" provided by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed patients, and the majority of patients became free form insulin with increasing levels of C-peptide along the time. In this review, we discuss the biology of hematopoietic stem cells and the possible advantages and disadvantages related to the high dose immunosuppression followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. |
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 | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 11 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 August 2012.
All research outputs
#15,248,503
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#644
of 1,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,905
of 165,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#17
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 165,221 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.