↓ Skip to main content

Creation of a cardiotropic adeno-associated virus: the story of viral directed evolution

Overview of attention for article published in Virology Journal, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Creation of a cardiotropic adeno-associated virus: the story of viral directed evolution
Published in
Virology Journal, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1743-422x-10-50
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lin Yang, Xiao Xiao

Abstract

Adeno-associated virus (AAV) is an important vector system for human gene therapy. Although use of AAV serotypes can result in efficient myocardial gene transfer, improvements in the transduction efficiency and specificity are still required. As a method for artificial modification and selection of gene function, directed evolution has been used for diverse applications in genetic engineering of enzymes and proteins. Since 2000, pioneering work has been performed on directed evolution of viral vectors. We further attempted to evolve the AAV using DNA shuffling and in vivo biopanning in a mouse model. An AAVM41 mutant was characterized, which was found to have improved transduction efficiency and specificity in myocardium, an attribute unknown for any natural AAV serotypes. This review focuses on the development of AAV vector for cardiac gene transfer, the history of directed evolution of viral vectors, and our creation of a cardiotropic AAV, which might have implications for the future design and application of viral vectors.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 31%
Researcher 9 18%
Student > Master 6 12%
Other 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 5 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 10%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Chemistry 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 6 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 08 April 2020.
All research outputs
#4,152,306
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from Virology Journal
#407
of 3,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,119
of 287,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology Journal
#5
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,030 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 287,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.