↓ Skip to main content

c-Kit modifies the inflammatory status of smooth muscle cells

Overview of attention for article published in PeerJ, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
c-Kit modifies the inflammatory status of smooth muscle cells
Published in
PeerJ, June 2017
DOI 10.7717/peerj.3418
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

c-Kit is a receptor tyrosine kinase present in multiple cell types, including vascular smooth muscle cells (SMC). However, little is known about how c-Kit influences SMC biology and vascular pathogenesis. High-throughput microarray assays and in silico pathway analysis were used to identify differentially expressed genes between primary c-Kit deficient (Kit(W/W-v)) and control (Kit(+/+)) SMC. Quantitative real-time RT-PCR and functional assays further confirmed the differences in gene expression and pro-inflammatory pathway regulation between both SMC populations. The microarray analysis revealed elevated NF-κB gene expression secondary to the loss of c-Kit that affects both the canonical and alternative NF-κB pathways. Upon stimulation with an oxidized phospholipid as pro-inflammatory agent, c-Kit deficient SMC displayed enhanced NF-κB transcriptional activity, higher phosphorylated/total p65 ratio, and increased protein expression of NF-κB regulated pro-inflammatory mediators with respect to cells from control mice. The pro-inflammatory phenotype of mutant cells was ameliorated after restoring c-Kit activity using lentiviral transduction. Functional assays further demonstrated that c-Kit suppresses NF-κB activity in SMC in a TGFβ-activated kinase 1 (TAK1) and Nemo-like kinase (NLK) dependent manner. Our study suggests a novel mechanism by which c-Kit suppresses NF-κB regulated pathways in SMC to prevent their pro-inflammatory transformation.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Other 4 25%
Unknown 7 44%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 June 2017.
All research outputs
#18,554,389
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from PeerJ
#10,999
of 13,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,150
of 317,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PeerJ
#309
of 358 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 317,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 358 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.