↓ Skip to main content

Splenectomy Alters Distribution and Turnover but not Numbers or Protective Capacity of de novo Generated Memory CD8 T-Cells

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Splenectomy Alters Distribution and Turnover but not Numbers or Protective Capacity of de novo Generated Memory CD8 T-Cells
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00568
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The spleen is a highly compartmentalized lymphoid organ that allows for efficient antigen presentation and activation of immune responses. Additionally, the spleen itself functions to remove senescent red blood cells, filter bacteria, and sequester platelets. Splenectomy, commonly performed after blunt force trauma or splenomegaly, has been shown to increase risk of certain bacterial and parasitic infections years after removal of the spleen. Although previous studies report defects in memory B-cells and IgM titers in splenectomized patients, the effect of splenectomy on CD8 T-cell responses and memory CD8 T-cell function remains ill defined. Using TCR-transgenic P14 cells, we demonstrate that homeostatic proliferation and representation of pathogen-specific memory CD8 T-cells in the blood are enhanced in splenectomized compared to sham surgery mice. Surprisingly, despite the enhanced turnover, splx mice displayed no changes in total memory CD8 T-cell numbers nor impaired protection against lethal dose challenge with Listeria monocytogenes. Thus, our data suggest that memory CD8 T-cell maintenance and function remain intact in the absence of the spleen.

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 profiles of 2 X users 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 27 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 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Student > Master 4 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Researcher 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 37%
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 23 November 2014.
All research outputs
#28,640,943
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#31,653
of 44,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,652
of 308,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#159
of 195 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 44,805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 308,665 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 195 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.