↓ Skip to main content

Cytokines induced killer cells produced in good manufacturing practices conditions: identification of the most advantageous and safest expansion method in terms of viability, cellular growth and…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Cytokines induced killer cells produced in good manufacturing practices conditions: identification of the most advantageous and safest expansion method in terms of viability, cellular growth and identity
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12967-018-1613-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara Castiglia, Aloe Adamini, Deborah Rustichelli, Laura Castello, Katia Mareschi, Giuseppe Pinnetta, Marco Leone, Alessandra Mandese, Ivana Ferrero, Giulia Mesiano, Franca Fagioli

Abstract

Cytokine-induced killer (CIK) cells are a very promising cell population raising growing interest in the field of cellular antitumor therapy. The aim of our study was to validate the most advantageous expansion method for this advanced therapy medicinal product (ATMP) and to translate it from preclinical field to good manufacturing practices (GMP). GMP ensures that ATMP are consistently produced and controlled to the quality standards required to their intended use. For this reason, the use of the xenogenic sera tended to be minimized by GMP for their high variability and the associated risk of transmitting infectious agents. We decided to replace Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS), largely used as medium supplement for CIKs expansion, with other culture media. Firstly, Human Serum (HS) and Human Pool Plasma (HPP) were tested as medium supplements giving not compliant results to acceptance criteria, established for CIKs, probably for the great batch to batch variability. Consequently, we decided to test three different serum free expansion media: X-VIVO 15, (largely used by other groups) and Tex Macs and Cell Genix GMP SCGM: two GMP manufactured media. We performed a validation consisting in three run-sand even if the small number of experiments didn't permit us to obtained statistical results we demonstrated that both X-VIVO 15 and Tex Macs fulfilled the quality standards in terms of cellular growth, viability and identity while Cell Genix GMP SCGM resulted not compliant as it caused some technical problems such as high mortality. In conclusion, these preclinical validation data lay the bases for a GMP-compliant process to improve the CIKs expansion method.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Student > Master 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 7 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 5 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 12%
Engineering 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 7 27%
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 14 August 2019.
All research outputs
#18,648,325
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,993
of 4,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,504
of 335,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#51
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 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 4,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 335,220 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 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.