Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a fatal lung disease manifested by overtly scarred peripheral and basilar regions and more normal-appearing central lung areas. Lung tissues from macroscopically normal-appearing (IPFn) and scarred (IPFs) areas of explanted IPF lungs were analyzed by RNASeq and compared with healthy control (HC) lung tissues. There were profound transcriptomic changes in IPFn compared with HC tissues, which included elevated expression of numerous immune-, inflammation-, and extracellular matrix-related mRNAs, and these changes were similar to those observed with IPFs compared to HC. Comparing IPFn directly to IPFs, elevated expression of epithelial mucociliary mRNAs was observed in the IPFs tissues. Thus, despite the known geographic tissue heterogeneity in IPF, the entire lung is actively involved in the disease process, and demonstrates pronounced elevated expression of numerous immune-related genes. Differences between normal-appearing and scarred tissues may thus be driven by deranged epithelial homeostasis or possibly non-transcriptomic factors.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
2
3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
2
3%
Unspecified
1
2%
Other
4
7%
Unknown
25
42%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 May 2026.
All research outputs
#7,880,335
of 29,833,186 outputs
Outputs from Cellular Immunology
#498
of 2,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,087
of 462,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular Immunology
#10
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,833,186 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,222 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 462,353 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 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
