↓ Skip to main content

Human Mast Cell Tryptase Is a Potential Treatment for Snakebite Envenoming Across Multiple Snake Species

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Human Mast Cell Tryptase Is a Potential Treatment for Snakebite Envenoming Across Multiple Snake Species
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01532
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Anderson, Kathrin Stavenhagen, Daniel Kolarich, Christian P. Sommerhoff, Marcus Maurer, Martin Metz

Abstract

Snake envenoming is a serious and neglected public health crisis that is responsible for as many as 125,000 deaths per year, which is one of the reasons the World Health Organization has recently reinstated snakebite envenoming to its list of category A neglected tropical diseases. Here, we investigated the ability of human mast cell proteases to detoxify six venoms from a spectrum of phylogenetically distinct snakes. To this end, we developed a zebrafish model to assess effects on the toxicity of the venoms and characterized the degradation of venom proteins by mass spectrometry. All snake venoms tested were detoxified by degradation of various venom proteins by the mast cell protease tryptase β, and not by other proteases. Our data show that recombinant human tryptase β degrades and detoxifies a phylogenetically wide range of venoms, indicating that recombinant human tryptase could possibly be developed as a universal antidote to venomous snakebites.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 11 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Environmental Science 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 16 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 05 April 2023.
All research outputs
#7,344,629
of 25,932,719 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#8,280
of 32,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,819
of 341,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#241
of 708 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,932,719 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,608 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 341,393 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 708 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 65% of its contemporaries.