↓ Skip to main content

MeCP2-mediated epigenetic regulation in senescent endothelial progenitor cells

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
MeCP2-mediated epigenetic regulation in senescent endothelial progenitor cells
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13287-018-0828-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chunli Wang, Fei Wang, Zhen Li, Qing Cao, Liya Huang, Shuyan Chen

Abstract

Cellular aging may be associated with epigenetics. Methyl-CpG-binding protein 2 (MeCP2) and sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) are two important epigenetic factors. Our former work demonstrated that MeCP2 expression increased and SIRT1 expression decreased in senescent endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs). This article aims to reveal the epigenetic regulation caused by MeCP2 in EPCs and discuss its mechanism. Tube formation assay and cell apoptosis detection were used to evaluate the function of senescent EPCs induced by MeCP2 overexpression. Western blot analysis was used to testify the relative protein expression changed by MeCP2. Bisulfite sequencing methylation assay and chromatin immunoprecipitation assay were used to assess the degree of methylation and the relation of MeCP2 and SIRT1. MeCP2 reduced angiogenesis of senescent EPCs, promoted apoptosis, and caused senescent EPC dysfunction through SIRT1 promoter hypermethylation and histone modification. MeCP2 mediated senescent EPC dysfunction through epigenetic regulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Researcher 3 17%
Unspecified 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Unspecified 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,980,451
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#1,217
of 2,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,846
of 329,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#40
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,431 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 329,125 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.