↓ Skip to main content

Dying cell clearance and its impact on the outcome of tumor radiotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
156 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
191 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
Dying cell clearance and its impact on the outcome of tumor radiotherapy
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2012.00116
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kirsten Lauber, Anne Ernst, Michael Orth, Martin Herrmann, Claus Belka

Abstract

The induction of tumor cell death is one of the major goals of radiotherapy and has been considered to be the central determinant of its therapeutic outcome for a long time. However, accumulating evidence suggests that the success of radiotherapy does not only derive from direct cytotoxic effects on the tumor cells alone, but instead might also depend - at least in part - on innate as well as adaptive immune responses, which can particularly target tumor cells that survive local irradiation. The clearance of dying tumor cells by phagocytic cells of the innate immune system represents a crucial step in this scenario. Dendritic cells and macrophages, which engulf, process and present dying tumor cell material to adaptive immune cells, can trigger, skew, or inhibit adaptive immune responses, respectively. In this review we summarize the current knowledge of different forms of cell death induced by ionizing radiation, the multi-step process of dying cell clearance, and its immunological consequences with special regard toward the potential exploitation of these mechanisms for the improvement of tumor radiotherapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 191 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 184 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 22%
Student > Master 32 17%
Researcher 31 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 13 7%
Other 33 17%
Unknown 24 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 55 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 19 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 16 8%
Unknown 27 14%
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 15 March 2020.
All research outputs
#15,998,913
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#5,508
of 22,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,046
of 250,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#56
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,440 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. 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 250,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 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.