↓ Skip to main content

Making the Switch: Alternatives to Fetal Bovine Serum for Adipose-Derived Stromal Cell Expansion

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, October 2016
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
166 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
Making the Switch: Alternatives to Fetal Bovine Serum for Adipose-Derived Stromal Cell Expansion
Published in
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fcell.2016.00115
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carla Dessels, Marnie Potgieter, Michael S. Pepper

Abstract

Adipose-derived stromal cells (ASCs) are being used extensively in clinical trials. These trials require that ASCs are prepared using good manufacturing practices (GMPs) and are safe for use in humans. The majority of clinical trials in which ASCs are expanded make use of fetal bovine serum (FBS). While FBS is used traditionally in the research setting for in vitro expansion, it does carry the risk of xenoimmunization and zoonotic transmission when used for expanding cells destined for therapeutic purposes. In order to ensure a GMP quality product for cellular therapy, in vitro expansion of ASCs has been undertaken using xeno-free (XF), chemically-defined, and human blood-derived alternatives. These investigations usually include the criteria proposed by the International Society of Cellular Therapy (ISCT) and International Fat Applied Technology Society (IFATS). The majority of studies use these criteria to compare plastic-adherence, morphology, the immunophenotype and the trilineage differentiation of ASCs under the different medium supplemented conditions. Based on these studies, all of the alternatives to FBS seem to be suitable replacements; however, each has its own advantages and drawbacks. Very few studies have investigated the effects of the supplements on the immunomodulation of ASCs; the transcriptome, proteome and secretome; and the ultimate effects in appropriate animal models. The selection of medium supplementation will depend on the downstream application of the ASCs and their efficacy and safety in preclinical studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 165 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 13%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Master 17 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 56 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 12%
Engineering 13 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 2%
Other 22 13%
Unknown 61 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 29 November 2021.
All research outputs
#2,402,064
of 25,059,640 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
#419
of 10,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,255
of 322,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
#5
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,059,640 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,307 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 322,772 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 91% of its contemporaries.