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 |
Comparative analysis of human mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow and adipose tissue under xeno-free conditions for cell therapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13287-015-0066-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chun-yu Li, Xiao-yun Wu, Jia-bei Tong, Xin-xin Yang, Jing-li Zhao, Quan-fu Zheng, Guo-bin Zhao, Zhi-jie Ma |
| Abstract |
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) are promising candidates for cell-based therapies. Human platelet lysate (hPL) represents an efficient alternative to fetal bovine serum for clinical-scale expansion of MSC. Different medium used in culture processes should maintain the biological characteristics of MSC during multiple passages. However, bone marrow MSC (BMMSC) and adipose tissue MSC (ATMSC) have not yet been directly compared with each other under hPL conditions. This study aims to conduct a direct head-to-head comparison of the biological characteristics of the two types of MSC under hPL-supplemented culture conditions for the ability to be used in regenerative medicine applications. The BMMSC and ATMSC were cultured under hPL conditions and evaluated their biological characteristics for cell therapy: morphology, immunophenotype, colony-forming unit-fibroblast (CFU-F) efficiency, proliferation capacity, potential for mesodermal differentiation, secreted proteins, and immunomodulatory effects. On hPL-supplemented culture conditions, BMMSC and ATMSC exhibited similar fibroblast-like morphology and expression patterns of surface markers. ATMSC had greater proliferative potential than BMMSC, while no significantly difference on colony efficiency were observed between two types of cells. However, BMMSC possessed higher capacity toward osteogenic and chondrogenic differentiation compared with ATMSC, while similar adipogenic differentiation potential were observed between two types of cells. There were some differences between BMMSC and ATMSC for several secreted proteins, such as cytokine (IFN-γ), growth factors (bFGF, HGF, and IGF-1), and chemokine (SDF-1). ATMSC had more potent immunomodulatory effects than BMMSC. ATMSC have biological advantages in the proliferative capacity, secreted proteins (bFGF, IFN-γ, and IGF-1), and immunomodulatory effects, but BMMSC in osteogenic and chondrogenic differentiation potential and secreted proteins (SDF-1 and HGF), these biological advantages should be considered systematically when choosing the MSC source for specific clinical application. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 370 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 366 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 70 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 60 | 16% |
| Researcher | 58 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 6% |
| Other | 53 | 14% |
| Unknown | 75 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 80 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 67 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 59 | 16% |
| Engineering | 19 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 42 | 11% |
| Unknown | 91 | 25% |
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 22 July 2017.
All research outputs
#17,753,591
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#1,581
of 2,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,640
of 264,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#52
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 264,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.