↓ Skip to main content

Allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells as induction therapy are safe and feasible in renal allografts: pilot results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells as induction therapy are safe and feasible in renal allografts: pilot results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12967-018-1422-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qipeng Sun, Zhengyu Huang, Fei Han, Ming Zhao, Ronghua Cao, Daqiang Zhao, Liangqing Hong, Ning Na, Heng Li, Bin Miao, Jianmin Hu, Fanhang Meng, Yanwen Peng, Qiquan Sun

Abstract

Kidneys from deceased donors are being used to meet the growing need for grafts. However, delayed graft function (DGF) and acute rejection incidences are high, leading to adverse effects on graft outcomes. Optimal induction intervention should include both renal structure injury repair and immune response suppression. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) with potent anti-inflammatory, regenerative, and immune-modulatory properties are considered a candidate to prevent DGF and acute rejection in renal transplantation. Thus, this prospective multicenter paired study aimed to assess the clinical value of allogeneic MSCs as induction therapy to prevent both DGF and acute rejection in deceased donor renal transplantation. Forty-two renal allograft recipients were recruited and divided into trial and control groups. The trial group (21 cases) received 2 × 106/kg human umbilical-cord-derived MSCs (UC-MSCs) via the peripheral vein before renal transplantation, and 5 × 106 cells via the renal artery during the surgical procedure. All recipients received standard induction therapy. Incidences of DGF and biopsy-proven acute rejection were recorded postoperatively and severe postoperative complications were assessed. Graft and recipient survivals were also evaluated. Treatment with UC-MSCs achieved comparable graft and recipient survivals with non-MSC treatment (P = 0.97 and 0.15, respectively). No increase in postoperative complications, including DGF and acute rejection, were observed (incidence of DGF: 9.5% in the MSC group versus 33.3% in the non-MSC group, P = 0.13; Incidence of acute rejection: 14.3% versus 4.8%, P = 0.61). Equal postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rates were found between the two groups (P = 0.88). All patients tolerated the MSCs infusion without adverse clinical effects. Additionally, a multiprobe fluorescence in situ hybridization assay revealed that UC-MSCs administered via the renal artery were absent from the recipient's biopsy sample. Umbilical-cord-derived MSCs can be used as clinically feasible and safe induction therapy. Adequate timing and frequency of UC-MSCs administration may have a significant effect on graft and recipient outcomes. Trial registration NCT02490020 . Registered on June 29 2015.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 33 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Unspecified 3 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 34 43%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,320,072
of 12,689,756 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,118
of 2,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,925
of 273,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,689,756 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 273,106 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them