↓ Skip to main content

MicroRNAs as potential targets for progressive pulmonary fibrosis

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
MicroRNAs as potential targets for progressive pulmonary fibrosis
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2015.00254
Pubmed ID
Authors

Subbiah Rajasekaran, P Rajaguru, P S Sudhakar Gandhi

Abstract

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic, progressive and devastating disorder. It is characterized by alveolar epithelial cell injury and activation, infiltration of inflammatory cells, initiation of epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT), aberrant proliferation and activation of fibroblasts, exaggerated deposition of extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins, and finally leading to the destruction of lung parenchyma. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are endogenous small non-coding RNA molecules that post-transcriptionally regulate gene expression in diverse biological and pathological processes, including cell proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis and metastasis. As a result, miRNAs have emerged as a major area of biomedical research with relevance to pulmonary fibrosis. In this context, the present review discusses specific patterns of dysregulated miRNAs in patients with IPF. Further, we discuss the current understanding of miRNAs involvement in regulating lung inflammation, TGF-β1-mediated EMT and fibroblast differentiation processes, ECM genes expression, and in the progression of lung fibrosis. The possible future directions that might lead to novel therapeutic strategies for the treatment of pulmonary fibrosis are also reviewed.

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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 68 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 19%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Master 6 9%
Other 4 6%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 13 19%
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 26 November 2015.
All research outputs
#18,430,119
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#8,235
of 16,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,282
of 285,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#53
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,070 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 285,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 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.