↓ Skip to main content

Inner ear cell therapy targeting hereditary deafness by activation of stem cell homing factors

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Inner ear cell therapy targeting hereditary deafness by activation of stem cell homing factors
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2015.00002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kazusaku Kamiya

Abstract

Congenital deafness affects about 1 in 1000 children and more than half of them have a genetic background such as Connexin26 (CX26) gene mutation. Inner ear cell therapy for sensorineural hearing loss has been expected to be an effective therapy for hereditary deafness. Previously, we developed a novel strategy for inner ear cell therapy using bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells as a supplement for cochlear fibrocytes functioning for cochlear ion transport. For cell therapy targeting hereditary deafness, a more effective cell delivery system to induce the stem cells into cochlear tissue is required, because gene mutations affect all cochlear cells cochlear cells expressing genes such as GJB2 encoding CX26. Stem cell homing is one of the crucial mechanisms to be activated for efficient cell delivery to the cochlear tissue. In our study, monocyte chemotactic protein-1, stromal cell-derived factor-1 and their receptors were found to be a key regulator for stem cell recruitment to the cochlear tissue. Thus, the activation of stem cell homing may be an efficient strategy for hearing recovery in hereditary deafness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Egypt 2 6%
South Africa 1 3%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 32 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 28%
Researcher 8 22%
Student > Master 7 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Other 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Engineering 2 6%
Materials Science 2 6%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 2 6%
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 27 January 2015.
All research outputs
#20,251,039
of 22,780,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#10,007
of 16,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#296,694
of 352,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#47
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,011 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 352,883 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.