↓ Skip to main content

HIV-1 cell-to-cell transmission and broadly neutralizing antibodies

Overview of attention for article published in Retrovirology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 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
HIV-1 cell-to-cell transmission and broadly neutralizing antibodies
Published in
Retrovirology, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12977-018-0434-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jérémy Dufloo, Timothée Bruel, Olivier Schwartz

Abstract

HIV-1 spreads through contacts between infected and target cells. Polarized viral budding at the contact site forms the virological synapse. Additional cellular processes, such as nanotubes, filopodia, virus accumulation in endocytic or phagocytic compartments promote efficient viral propagation. Cell-to-cell transmission allows immune evasion and likely contributes to HIV-1 spread in vivo. Anti-HIV-1 broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAbs) defeat the majority of circulating viral strains by binding to the viral envelope glycoprotein (Env). Several bNAbs have entered clinical evaluation during the last years. It is thus important to understand their mechanism of action and to determine how they interact with infected cells. In experimental models, HIV-1 cell-to-cell transmission is sensitive to neutralization, but the effect of antibodies is often less marked than during cell-free infection. This may be due to differences in the conformation or accessibility of Env at the surface of virions and cells. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on HIV-1 cell-to-cell transmission and discuss the role of bNAbs during this process.

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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 92 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 34 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 15 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 37 40%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,542,250
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Retrovirology
#783
of 1,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,493
of 330,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Retrovirology
#14
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,110 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 330,143 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.