↓ Skip to main content

E-Peptides Control Bioavailability of IGF-1

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
53 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.
Title
E-Peptides Control Bioavailability of IGF-1
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0051152
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marianne Smedegaard Hede, Ekaterina Salimova, Agnieszka Piszczek, Emarald Perlas, Nadine Winn, Tommaso Nastasi, Nadia Rosenthal

Abstract

Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) is a potent cytoprotective growth factor that has attracted considerable attention as a promising therapeutic agent. Transgenic over-expression of IGF-1 propeptides facilitates protection and repair in a broad range of tissues, although transgenic mice over-expressing IGF-1 propeptides display little or no increase in IGF-1 serum levels, even with high levels of transgene expression. IGF-1 propeptides are encoded by multiple alternatively spliced transcripts including C-terminal extension (E) peptides, which are highly positively charged. In the present study, we use decellularized mouse tissue to show that the E-peptides facilitate in vitro binding of murine IGF-1 to the extracellular matrix (ECM) with varying affinities. This property is independent of IGF-1, since proteins consisting of the E-peptides fused to relaxin, a related member of the insulin superfamily, bound equally avidly to decellularized ECM. Thus, the E-peptides control IGF-1 bioavailability by preventing systemic circulation, offering a potentially powerful way to tether IGF-1 and other therapeutic proteins to the site of synthesis and/or administration.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 52 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 26%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 11 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 30 October 2018.
All research outputs
#6,925,375
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#81,684
of 193,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,392
of 278,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,642
of 4,843 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 278,789 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 4,843 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.