↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Cigarette Smoking on Transplant Survival: Extending or Shortening It?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Effects of Cigarette Smoking on Transplant Survival: Extending or Shortening It?
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00127
Pubmed ID
Authors

Feifei Qiu, Ping Fan, Golay D. Nie, Huazhen Liu, Chun-Ling Liang, Wanlin Yu, Zhenhua Dai

Abstract

Cigarette smoking (CS) regulates both innate and adaptive immunity and causes numerous diseases, including cardiovascular, respiratory, and autoimmune diseases, allergies, cancers, and transplant rejection. Therefore, smoking poses a serious challenge to the healthcare system worldwide. Epidemiological studies have always shown that CS is one of the major risk factors for transplant rejection, even though smoking plays redundant roles in regulating immune responses. The complex roles for smoking in immunoregulation are likely due to molecular and functional diversities of cigarette smoke components, including carbon monoxide (CO) and nicotine. Especially, CO has been shown to induce immune tolerance. Although CS has been shown to impact transplantation by causing complications and subsequent rejection, it is overlooked whether CS interferes with transplant tolerance. We have previously demonstrated that cigarette smoke exposure reverses long-term allograft survival induced by costimulatory blockade. Given that CS impacts both adaptive and innate immunity and that it hinders long-term transplant survival, our perspective is that CS impacts transplant tolerance. Here, we review impacts of CS on major immune cells that are critical for transplant outcomes and propose the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying its effects on alloimmunity and transplant survival. Further investigations are warranted to fully understand why CS exerts deleterious rather than beneficial effects on transplant survival even if some of its components are immunosuppressive.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Professor 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 8 47%
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 15 February 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#27,431
of 31,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#367,776
of 427,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#352
of 390 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,531 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 427,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 390 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.