↓ Skip to main content

Impaired Expression of Focal Adhesion Kinase in Mesenchymal Stromal Cells from Low-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Impaired Expression of Focal Adhesion Kinase in Mesenchymal Stromal Cells from Low-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome Patients
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2017.00164
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuenv Wu, Carmen Mariana Aanei, Sanae Kesr, Tiphanie Picot, Denis Guyotat, Lydia Campos Catafal

Abstract

The pathogenic role of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) development and progression has been investigated by numerous studies, yet, it remains controversial in some aspects (1, 2). In the present study, we found distinct features of MSCs from low-risk (LR)-MDS stromal microenvironment as compared to those from healthy subjects. At the molecular level, focal adhesion kinase, a key tyrosine kinase in control of cell proliferation, survival, and adhesion process, was found profoundly suppressed in expression and activation in LR-MDS MSC. At a functional level, LR-MDS MSCs showed impaired growth and clonogenic capacity, which were independent of cellular senescence and apoptosis. The pro-adipogenic differentiation and attenuated osteogenic capacity along with reduced SDF-1 expression could be involved in creating an unfavorable microenvironment for hematopoiesis. In conclusion, our experiments support the theory that the stromal microenvironment is fundamentally altered in LR-MDS, and these preliminary data offer a new perspective on LR-MDS pathophysiology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 38%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Student > Postgraduate 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Unknown 5 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 8%
Unknown 6 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,318
of 22,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,396
of 327,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#59
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,428 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 327,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.