↓ 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, June 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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
691 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
476 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, June 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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 476 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%
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 454 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 114 24%
Researcher 83 17%
Student > Master 55 12%
Student > Bachelor 36 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 6%
Other 66 14%
Unknown 93 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 118 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 67 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 38 8%
Chemistry 33 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 6%
Other 79 17%
Unknown 111 23%
Attention Score in Context

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
#4,369,647
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#163
of 614 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,855
of 181,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 614 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 181,086 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 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.