↓ Skip to main content

Infection of Xenotransplanted Human Cell Lines by Murine Retroviruses: A Lesson Brought Back to Light by XMRV

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
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 (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Infection of Xenotransplanted Human Cell Lines by Murine Retroviruses: A Lesson Brought Back to Light by XMRV
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2013.00156
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heidi A. Hempel, Kathleen H. Burns, Angelo M. De Marzo, Karen S. Sfanos

Abstract

Infection of xenotransplanted human cells by xenotropic retroviruses is a known phenomenon in the scientific literature, with examples cited since the early 1970s. However, arguably, until recently, the importance of this phenomenon had not been largely recognized. The emergence and subsequent debunking of Xenotropic Murine leukemia virus-Related Virus (XMRV) as a cell culture contaminant as opposed to a potential pathogen in several human diseases, notably prostate cancer and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, highlighted a potential problem of murine endogenous gammaretroviruses infecting commonly used human cell lines. Subsequent to the discovery of XMRV, many additional cell lines that underwent xenotransplantation in mice have been shown to harbor murine gammaretroviruses. Such retroviral infection poses the threat of not only confounding experiments performed in these cell lines via virus-induced changes in cellular behavior but also the potential infection of other cell lines cultured in the same laboratory. Thus, the possibility of xenotropic retroviral infection of cell lines may warrant additional precautions, such as periodic testing for retroviral sequences in cell lines cultured in the laboratory.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Lecturer 3 10%
Other 8 28%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 4 14%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 February 2017.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#3,352
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,366
of 289,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#69
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 289,004 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 328 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.