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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Translating Mechanism of Regulatory Action of Tolerogenic Dendritic Cells to Monitoring Endpoints in Clinical Trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01598 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jessica S. Suwandi, Tatjana Nikolic, Bart O. Roep |
| Abstract |
Tolerogenic dendritic cells (tolDCs) have reached patients with autoimmune and inflammatory disease, at least in clinical trials. The safety of tolDCs as intervention therapy has been established, but the capacity to modulate autoimmune response in vivo remains to be demonstrated. Studies have revealed a diversity of regulatory mechanisms that tolDCs may employ in vivo. These mechanisms differ between various types of modulated tolDC. The most often foreseen action of tolDCs is through regulatory polarization of naïve T cells or activation of existing regulatory T cells, which should ultimately diminish autoimmune inflammation. Yet, selection of a target autoantigen remains critical to expedite tissue specific tolerance induction, while measuring immune modulation incited by tolDCs in vivo provides a great challenge. We will discuss the regulatory action of different types of tolDCs and the possible methods to monitor immunological efficacy endpoints for the next generation clinical trials. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ecuador | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 28% |
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 9 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 13 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,393,794
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#11,654
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,315
of 445,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#277
of 581 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,537 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 61% 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 445,683 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 581 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 51% of its contemporaries.