↓ Skip to main content

The Four types of Tregs in malignant lymphomas

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Hematology & Oncology, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
The Four types of Tregs in malignant lymphomas
Published in
Journal of Hematology & Oncology, December 2011
DOI 10.1186/1756-8722-4-50
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jing Wang, Xiao-Yan Ke

Abstract

Regulatory T cells (Tregs) are a specialized subpopulation of CD4(+) T cells, which act to suppress the activation of other immune cells. Tregs represent important modulators for the interaction between lymphomas and host microenvironment. Lymphomas are a group of serious and frequently fatal malignant diseases of lymphocytes. Recent studies revealed that some lymphoma T cells might adopt a Treg profile. Assessment of Treg phenotypes and genotypes in patients may offer prediction of outcome in many types of lymphomas including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, cutaneous T cell lymphoma, and Hodgkin's lymphoma. Based on characterized roles of Tregs in lymphomas, we can categorize the various roles into four groups: (a) suppressor Tregs; (b) malignant Tregs; (c) direct tumor-killing Tregs; and (d) incompetent Tregs. The classification into four groups is significant in predicting prognosis and designing Tregs-based immunotherapies for treating lymphomas. In patients with lymphomas where Tregs serve either as suppressor Tregs or malignant Tregs, anti-tumor cytotoxicity is suppressed thus decreased numbers of Tregs are associated with a good prognosis. In contrast, in patients with lymphomas where Tregs serve as tumor-killing Tregs and incompetent Tregs, anti-tumor cytotoxicity is enhanced or anti-autoimmune Tregs activities are weakened thus increased numbers of Tregs are associated with a good prognosis and reduced numbers of Tregs are associated with a poor prognosis. However, the mechanisms underlying the various roles of Tregs in patients with lymphomas remain unknown. Therefore, further research is needed in this regard as well as the utility of Tregs as prognostic factors and therapy strategies in different lymphomas.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 84 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Student > Master 11 13%
Other 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 7%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 14 16%
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 15 April 2012.
All research outputs
#20,156,537
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#1,032
of 1,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,829
of 240,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hematology & Oncology
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 240,792 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.