↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
3 patents

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
T-cell defect in diffuse large B-cell lymphomas involves expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells
Published in
Blood, June 2016
DOI 10.1182/blood-2015-08-662783
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the number of circulating monocytes and neutrophils represents an independent prognostic factor. These cell subsets include monocytic and granulocytic myeloid derived suppressor cells (M- and G-MDSCs) defined by their ability to suppress T-cell responses. MDSCs are a heterogeneous population described in inflammatory and infectious diseases as well as in numerous tumors including multiple myeloma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia and DLBCL. However, their mechanisms of action remain unclear. We broadly assessed the presence and mechanisms of suppression of MDSC subsets in DLBCL. First, a myeloid suppressive signature was identified by gene expression profiling in DLBCL peripheral blood. Accordingly, we identified in a cohort of 66 DLBCL patients an increase in circulating G-MDSC (Lin(neg)HLA-DR(neg)CD33(pos)CD11b(pos)) and M-MDSC (CD14(pos)HLA-DR(low)) counts. Interestingly, only M-MDSC number was correlated with the International Prognostic Index (IPI), the event-free survival (EFS), and the number of circulating Treg Furthermore, T-cell proliferation was restored after monocyte depletion. Myeloid-dependent T-cell suppression was attributed to a release of IL-10 and S100A12 and an increased PD-L1 expression. In summary, we identified expanded MDSC subsets in DLBCL as well as new mechanisms of immunosuppression in DLBCL.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 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 119 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 17%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 10%
Other 6 5%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 36 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 42 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 06 July 2026.
All research outputs
#5,135,523
of 34,324,933 outputs
Outputs from Blood
#9,501
of 46,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,265
of 343,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Blood
#100
of 282 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,324,933 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 46,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 343,987 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 282 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 64% of its contemporaries.