↓ Skip to main content

Eosinophil ETosis and DNA Traps: a New Look at Eosinophilic Inflammation

Overview of attention for article published in Current Allergy and Asthma Reports, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
Title
Eosinophil ETosis and DNA Traps: a New Look at Eosinophilic Inflammation
Published in
Current Allergy and Asthma Reports, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11882-016-0634-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shigeharu Ueki, Takahiro Tokunaga, Shigeharu Fujieda, Kohei Honda, Makoto Hirokawa, Lisa A. Spencer, Peter F. Weller

Abstract

The traditional paradigm of eosinophils as end-stage damaging cells has mainly relied on their release of cytotoxic proteins. Cytokine-induced cell survival and secretion of granular contents from tissue-dwelling eosinophil are thought to be important mechanisms for eosinophilic inflammatory disorders, although the occurrence of cytolysis and its products (i.e., free extracellular granules) has been observed in affected lesions. Recent evidence indicates that activated eosinophils can exhibit a non-apoptotic cell death pathway, namely extracellular trap cell death (ETosis) that mediates the eosinophil cytolytic degranulation. Here, we discuss the current concept of eosinophil ETosis which provides a new look at eosinophilic inflammation. Lessons from eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis revealed that ETosis-derived DNA traps, composed of stable web-like chromatin, contribute to the properties of highly viscous eosinophilic mucin and impairments in its clearance. Intact granules entrapped in DNA traps are causing long-lasting inflammation but also might have immunoregulatory roles. Eosinophils possess a way to have post-postmortem impacts on innate immunity, local immune response, sterile inflammation, and tissue damage.

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 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 16%
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Student > Master 9 10%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 27%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 20 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 July 2017.
All research outputs
#13,985,455
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Current Allergy and Asthma Reports
#500
of 805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,766
of 354,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Allergy and Asthma Reports
#13
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 354,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.