↓ Skip to main content

Prospective Clinical Testing of Regulatory Dendritic Cells in Organ Transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Prospective Clinical Testing of Regulatory Dendritic Cells in Organ Transplantation
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angus W. Thomson, Alan F. Zahorchak, Mohamed B. Ezzelarab, Lisa H. Butterfield, Fadi G. Lakkis, Diana M. Metes

Abstract

Dendritic cells (DC) are rare, professional antigen-presenting cells with ability to induce or regulate alloimmune responses. Regulatory DC (DCreg) with potential to down-modulate acute and chronic inflammatory conditions that occur in organ transplantation can be generated in vitro under a variety of conditions. Here, we provide a rationale for evaluation of DCreg therapy in clinical organ transplantation with the goal of promoting sustained, donor-specific hyporesponsiveness, while lowering the incidence and severity of rejection and reducing patients' dependence on anti-rejection drugs. Generation of donor- or recipient-derived DCreg that suppress T cell responses and prolong transplant survival in rodents or non-human primates has been well-described. Recently, good manufacturing practice (GMP)-grade DCreg have been produced at our Institution for prospective use in human organ transplantation. We briefly review experience of regulatory immune therapy in organ transplantation and describe our experience generating and characterizing human monocyte-derived DCreg. We propose a phase I/II safety study in which the influence of donor-derived DCreg combined with conventional immunosuppression on subclinical and clinical rejection and host alloimmune responses will be examined in detail.

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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 17%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 6 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Psychology 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 5 17%
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 10 February 2016.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#18,323
of 31,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,439
of 405,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#79
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,516 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 405,486 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.