↓ Skip to main content

Different effects of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and erythropoietin on erythropoiesis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Different effects of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and erythropoietin on erythropoiesis
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13287-018-0877-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tzu-Lin Chen, Ya-Wen Chiang, Guan-Ling Lin, Hsin-Hou Chang, Te-Sheng Lien, Min-Hua Sheh, Der-Shan Sun

Abstract

Red blood cells are the most abundant cells in the blood that deliver oxygen to the whole body. Erythropoietin (EPO), a positive regulator of erythropoiesis, is currently the major treatment for chronic anemia. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a multifunctional cytokine and a well-known regulator of hematopoietic stem cell proliferation, differentiation, and mobilization. The use of EPO in combination with G-CSF has been reported to synergistically improve erythroid responses in a group of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes who did not respond to EPO treatment alone; however, the mechanism remains unclear. C57BL/6 J mice injected with G-CSF or EPO were used to compare the erythropoiesis status and the efficiency of erythroid mobilization by flow cytometry. In this study, we found that G-CSF induced more orthochromatophilic erythroblast production than did EPO in the bone marrow and spleen. In addition, in contrast to EPO treatments, G-CSF treatments enhanced the efficiency of the mobilization of newly synthesized reticulocytes into peripheral blood. Our results demonstrated that the effects of G-CSF on erythropoiesis and erythrocytic mobilization were independent of EPO secretion and, in contrast to EPO, G-CSF promoted progression of erythropoiesis through transition of early stage R2 (basophilic erythroblasts) to late stage R4 (orthochromatophilic erythroblasts). We demonstrate for the first time that G-CSF treatments induce a faster erythropoiesis-enhancing response than that of EPO. These findings suggest an alternative approach to treating acute anemia, especially when patients are experiencing a clinical emergency in remote areas without proper blood bank supplies.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 21%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 October 2020.
All research outputs
#6,880,060
of 23,051,185 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#658
of 2,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,219
of 326,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#19
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,051,185 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
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 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 326,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.