↓ Skip to main content

The role of PPARγ in carbon nanotube-elicited granulomatous lung inflammation

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
The role of PPARγ in carbon nanotube-elicited granulomatous lung inflammation
Published in
Respiratory Research, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1465-9921-14-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isham Huizar, Anagha Malur, Janki Patel, Matthew McPeek, Larry Dobbs, Christopher Wingard, Barbara P Barna, Mary Jane Thomassen

Abstract

Although granulomatous inflammation is a central feature of many disease processes, cellular mechanisms of granuloma formation and persistence are poorly understood. Carbon nanoparticles, which can be products of manufacture or the environment, have been associated with granulomatous disease. This paper utilizes a previously described carbon nanoparticle granuloma model to address the issue of whether peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ), a nuclear transcription factor and negative regulator of inflammatory cytokines might play a role in granulomatous lung disease. PPARγ is constitutively expressed in alveolar macrophages from healthy individuals but is depressed in alveolar macrophages of patients with sarcoidosis, a prototypical granulomatous disease. Our previous study of macrophage-specific PPARγ KO mice had revealed an intrinsically inflammatory pulmonary environment with an elevated pro-inflammatory cytokines profile as compared to wild-type mice. Based on such observations we hypothesized that PPARγ expression would be repressed in alveolar macrophages from animals bearing granulomas induced by MWCNT instillation.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 3%
Unknown 33 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 24%
Other 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 18%
Chemistry 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 26%
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 17 July 2013.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#2,958
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,693
of 288,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#27
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. 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 288,066 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 31 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.