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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
IFN-λ1 in CHO cells: its expression and biological activity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s11658-017-0057-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wu-mei Yuan, Wan-ju Zhang, Fen-lian Ma, Jin-song Li, Qian Zhang, Li-shu Zheng |
| Abstract |
Many studies have investigated the characteristics and biological activities of type III interferon (IFN), finding that it has similar features to type I IFN but also unique actions because it is recognized by a different receptor. A full-length recombinant human IFN-λ1 (rhIFN-λ1) cDNA was cloned into the pDF expression vector and stably expressed in Flp-In-CHO cells. After four purification steps (ammonium sulfate precipitation, SP Sepharose chromatography, Blue Sepharose 6 fast flow affinity chromatography and molecular sieve chromatography), the rhIFN-λ1 had a purity of about 90% and was found to have the predicted biological activities. The anti-viral activity of rhIFN-λ1 was determined as 106 IU/mg using the vesicular stomatitis virus (WISH-VSV) assay system. The anti-proliferation activity of rhIFN-λ1 was measured using the MTS method and the growth inhibition ratio was 57% higher than that for recombinant human IFN-α2b (rhIFN-α2b) when the rhIFN-λ1 concentration was 1000 IU/ml. rhIFN-λ1 had lower natural killer cell cytotoxicity than rhIFN-α2b. The Flp-In-CHO system is suitable for stably expressing rhIFN-λ1 that possesses the predicted anti-viral, anti-proliferation and natural killer cell cytotoxicity-promoting activities. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 7 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
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 08 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,578,649
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters
#249
of 484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#325,789
of 437,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular & Molecular Biology Letters
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 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 484 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 437,935 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.