↓ Skip to main content

The Neutrophil’s Choice: Phagocytose vs Make Neutrophil Extracellular Traps

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
210 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
The Neutrophil’s Choice: Phagocytose vs Make Neutrophil Extracellular Traps
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00288
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angelo A. Manfredi, Giuseppe A. Ramirez, Patrizia Rovere-Querini, Norma Maugeri

Abstract

Neutrophils recognize particulate substrates of microbial or endogenous origin and react by sequestering the cargoviaphagocytosis or by releasing neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) outside the cell, thus modifying and alerting the environment and bystander leukocytes. The signals that determine the choice between phagocytosis and the generation of NETs are still poorly characterized. Neutrophils that had phagocytosed bulky particulate substrates, such as apoptotic cells and activated platelets, appear to be "poised" in an unresponsive state. Environmental conditions, the metabolic, adhesive and activation state of the phagocyte, and the size of and signals associated with the tethered phagocytic cargo influence the choice of the neutrophils, prompting either phagocytic clearance or the generation of NETs. The choice is dichotomic and apparently irreversible. Defects in phagocytosis may foster the intravascular generation of NETs, thus promoting vascular inflammation and morbidities associated with diseases characterized by defective phagocytic clearance, such as systemic lupus erythematosus. There is a strong potential for novel treatments based on new knowledge of the events determining the inflammatory and pro-thrombotic function of inflammatory leukocytes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 210 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 18%
Researcher 31 15%
Student > Bachelor 29 14%
Student > Master 22 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Other 32 15%
Unknown 45 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 52 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 45 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 2%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 49 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 March 2021.
All research outputs
#6,498,682
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#6,848
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,678
of 344,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#206
of 683 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
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 done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 344,345 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 683 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 69% of its contemporaries.