↓ Skip to main content

Mesenchymal stem cell therapy for doxorubicin cardiomyopathy: hopes and fears

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, June 2015
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
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Mesenchymal stem cell therapy for doxorubicin cardiomyopathy: hopes and fears
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13287-015-0109-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando Ezquer, Jaime Gutiérrez, Marcelo Ezquer, Christian Caglevic, Helio C Salgado, Sebastián D Calligaris

Abstract

Chemotherapy has made an essential contribution to cancer treatment in recent decades despite its adverse effects. As cancer survivors have increased, concern about ex-patient lifespan has become more important too. Doxorubicin is an effective anti-neoplastic drug that produces a cardiotoxic effect. Cancer survivors who received doxorubicin became more vulnerable to cardiac disease than the normal population did. Many efforts have been made to prevent cardiac toxicity in patients with cancer. However, current therapies cannot guarantee permanent cardiac protection. One of their main limitations is that they do not promote myocardium regeneration. In this review, we summarize and discuss the promising use of mesenchymal stem cells for cardio-protection or cardio-regeneration therapies and consider their regenerative potential without leaving aside their controversial effects on tumor progression.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 7 17%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Unspecified 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 12 29%
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 03 January 2016.
All research outputs
#15,835,490
of 25,067,172 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#1,305
of 2,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,087
of 269,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#18
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,067,172 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 269,593 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.