↓ Skip to main content

Allogeneic endometrial regenerative cells: An "Off the shelf solution" for critical limb ischemia?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, August 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
131 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Allogeneic endometrial regenerative cells: An "Off the shelf solution" for critical limb ischemia?
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, August 2008
DOI 10.1186/1479-5876-6-45
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael P Murphy, Hao Wang, Amit N Patel, Suman Kambhampati, Niren Angle, Kyle Chan, Annette M Marleau, Andrew Pyszniak, Ewa Carrier, Thomas E Ichim, Neil H Riordan

Abstract

Critical limb ischemia (CLI) is an advanced form of peripheral artery disease which is responsible for approximately 100,000 amputations per year in the US. Trials to date have reported clinical improvement and reduced need for amputation in CLI patients receiving autologous bone marrow or mobilized peripheral blood stem cells for stimulation of angiogenesis. While such treatments are currently entering Phase III trials, practical and scientific pitfalls will limit widespread implementation if efficacy is proven. Hurdles to be overcome include: a) reduced angiogenic potential of autologous cells in aged patients with cardiovascular risk factors; b) invasiveness/adverse effects of bone marrow extraction and G-CSF mobilization, respectively; and c) need for on-site cellular manipulation. The Endometrial Regenerative Cell (ERC) is a mesenchymal-like stem cell derived from the menstrual blood that is believed to be associated with endometrial angiogenesis. We discuss the possibility of using allogeneic ERCs as an "off the shelf" treatment for CLI based on the following properties: a) High levels of growth factors and matrix metalloprotease production; b) Ability to inhibits inflammatory responses and lack of immunogenicity; and c) Expandability to great quantities without loss of differentiation ability or karyotypic abnormalities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 1%
Unknown 81 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 16%
Other 9 11%
Professor 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 22 26%
Unknown 7 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 12%
Engineering 6 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 5%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 9 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 July 2017.
All research outputs
#12,276,003
of 21,641,192 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,362
of 3,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,235
of 248,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,641,192 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,743 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 248,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them