↓ Skip to main content

Microbiota-Specific CD4CD8αα Tregs: Role in Intestinal Immune Homeostasis and Implications for IBD

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Microbiota-Specific CD4CD8αα Tregs: Role in Intestinal Immune Homeostasis and Implications for IBD
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00522
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guillaume Sarrabayrouse, Joudy Alameddine, Frédéric Altare, Francine Jotereau

Abstract

In studies in murine models, active suppression by IL-10-secreting Foxp3 regulatory T cells (Tregs) has emerged as an essential mechanism in colon homeostasis. However, the role of the equivalent subset in humans remains unclear, leading to suggestions that other subsets and/or mechanisms may substitute for Foxp3 Tregs in the maintenance of colon homeostasis. We recently described a new subset of CD4CD8αα T cells reactive to the gut bacterium Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and endowed with regulatory/suppressive functions. This subset is abundant in the healthy colonic mucosa, but less common in that of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We discuss here the physiological significance and potential role of these Tregs in preventing inflammation of the gut mucosa and the potential applications of these discoveries for IBD management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Serbia 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 53 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 27%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 13 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#14,207
of 31,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,025
of 290,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#69
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 290,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 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 55% of its contemporaries.