↓ Skip to main content

Autophagy and lysosomal dysfunction as emerging mechanisms of nanomaterial toxicity

Overview of attention for article published in Particle and Fibre Toxicology, January 2012
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 (84th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
558 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
400 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
Autophagy and lysosomal dysfunction as emerging mechanisms of nanomaterial toxicity
Published in
Particle and Fibre Toxicology, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1743-8977-9-20
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephan T Stern, Pavan P Adiseshaiah, Rachael M Crist

Abstract

The study of the potential risks associated with the manufacture, use, and disposal of nanoscale materials, and their mechanisms of toxicity, is important for the continued advancement of nanotechnology. Currently, the most widely accepted paradigms of nanomaterial toxicity are oxidative stress and inflammation, but the underlying mechanisms are poorly defined. This review will highlight the significance of autophagy and lysosomal dysfunction as emerging mechanisms of nanomaterial toxicity. Most endocytic routes of nanomaterial cell uptake converge upon the lysosome, making the lysosomal compartment the most common intracellular site of nanoparticle sequestration and degradation. In addition to the endo-lysosomal pathway, recent evidence suggests that some nanomaterials can also induce autophagy. Among the many physiological functions, the lysosome, by way of the autophagy (macroautophagy) pathway, degrades intracellular pathogens, and damaged organelles and proteins. Thus, autophagy induction by nanoparticles may be an attempt to degrade what is perceived by the cell as foreign or aberrant. While the autophagy and endo-lysosomal pathways have the potential to influence the disposition of nanomaterials, there is also a growing body of literature suggesting that biopersistent nanomaterials can, in turn, negatively impact these pathways. Indeed, there is ample evidence that biopersistent nanomaterials can cause autophagy and lysosomal dysfunctions resulting in toxicological consequences.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 400 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Russia 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Other 4 1%
Unknown 378 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 110 28%
Researcher 78 20%
Student > Master 53 13%
Student > Bachelor 33 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 5%
Other 56 14%
Unknown 50 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 116 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 63 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 32 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 7%
Chemistry 26 7%
Other 69 17%
Unknown 65 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 January 2017.
All research outputs
#1,772,353
of 12,521,989 outputs
Outputs from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#70
of 370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,072
of 187,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,521,989 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 370 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 187,741 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.