↓ Skip to main content

Prospects for clinical use of reprogrammed cells for autologous treatment of macular degeneration

Overview of attention for article published in Fibrogenesis & Tissue Repair, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Prospects for clinical use of reprogrammed cells for autologous treatment of macular degeneration
Published in
Fibrogenesis & Tissue Repair, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13069-015-0026-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Belen Alvarez Palomo, Samuel McLenachan, Fred K Chen, Lyndon Da Cruz, Rodney J Dilley, Jordi Requena, Michaela Lucas, Andrew Lucas, Micha Drukker, Michael J Edel

Abstract

Since the discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) in 2006, the symptoms of many human diseases have been reversed in animal models with iPSC therapy, setting the stage for future clinical development. From the animal data it is clear that iPSC are rapidly becoming the lead cell type for cell replacement therapy and for the newly developing field of iPSC-derived body organ transplantation. The first human pathology that might be treated in the near future with iPSC is age-related macular degeneration (AMD), which has recently passed the criteria set down by regulators for phase I clinical trials with allogeneic human embryonic stem cell-derived cell transplantation in humans. Given that iPSC are currently in clinical trial in Japan (RIKEN) to treat AMD, the establishment of a set of international criteria to make clinical-grade iPSC and their differentiated progeny is the next step in order to prepare for future autologous cell therapy clinical trials. Armed with clinical-grade iPSC, we can then specifically test for their threat of cancer, for proper and efficient differentiation to the correct cell type to treat human disease and then to determine their immunogenicity. Such a rigorous approach sets a far more relevant paradigm for their intended future use than non-clinical-grade iPSC. This review focuses on the latest developments regarding the first possible use of iPSC-derived retinal pigment epithelial cells in treating human disease, covers data gathered on animal models to date and methods to make clinical-grade iPSC, suggests techniques to ensure quality control and discusses possible clinical immune responses.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 20%
Student > Bachelor 12 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 17%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 9 15%
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 14 January 2016.
All research outputs
#18,436,183
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Fibrogenesis & Tissue Repair
#68
of 83 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,989
of 264,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Fibrogenesis & Tissue Repair
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 264,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.