↓ Skip to main content

Targeting of cancer neoantigens with donor-derived T cell receptor repertoires

Overview of attention for article published in Science, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
754 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
Targeting of cancer neoantigens with donor-derived T cell receptor repertoires
Published in
Science, May 2016
DOI 10.1126/science.aaf2288
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erlend Strønen, Mireille Toebes, Sander Kelderman, Marit M van Buuren, Weiwen Yang, Nienke van Rooij, Marco Donia, Maxi-Lu Böschen, Fridtjof Lund-Johansen, Johanna Olweus, Ton N Schumacher

Abstract

Accumulating evidence suggests that clinically efficacious cancer immunotherapies are driven by T cell reactivity against DNA mutation-derived neoantigens. However, among the large number of predicted neoantigens, only a minority is recognized by autologous patient T cells, and strategies to broaden neoantigen specific T cell responses are therefore attractive. Here, we demonstrate that naïve T cell repertoires of healthy blood donors provide a source of neoantigen-specific T cells, responding to 11/57 predicted HLA-A2-binding epitopes from three patients. Many of the T cell reactivities involved epitopes that in vivo were neglected by patient autologous tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. Finally, T cells re-directed with T cell receptors identified from donor-derived T cells efficiently recognized patient-derived melanoma cells harboring the relevant mutations, providing a rationale for the use of such "outsourced" immune responses in cancer immunotherapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 59 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 754 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 <1%
Korea, Republic of 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 740 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 175 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 157 21%
Student > Master 81 11%
Other 58 8%
Student > Bachelor 43 6%
Other 108 14%
Unknown 132 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 159 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 152 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 116 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 101 13%
Engineering 24 3%
Other 59 8%
Unknown 143 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 353. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#93,497
of 25,791,949 outputs
Outputs from Science
#3,140
of 83,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,889
of 350,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#52
of 1,153 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,791,949 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83,344 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 350,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,153 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.