↓ Skip to main content

Systemic epigenetic response to recombinant lentiviral vectors independent of proviral integration

Overview of attention for article published in Epigenetics & Chromatin, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Systemic epigenetic response to recombinant lentiviral vectors independent of proviral integration
Published in
Epigenetics & Chromatin, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13072-016-0077-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tamas Aranyi, Daniel Stockholm, Roseline Yao, Catherine Poinsignon, Thibaut Wiart, Guillaume Corre, Nizar Touleimat, Jörg Tost, Anne Galy, Andràs Paldi

Abstract

Lentiviral vectors (LV) are widely used for various gene transfer or gene therapy applications. The effects of LV on target cells are expected to be limited to gene delivery. Yet, human hematopoietic CD34+ cells respond to functional LVs as well as several types of non-integrating LVs by genome-wide DNA methylation changes. A new algorithm for the analysis of 450K Illumina data showed that these changes were marked by de novo methylation. The same 4126 cytosines located in islands corresponding to 1059 genes were systematically methylated. This effect required cellular entry of the viral particle in the cells but not the genomic integration of the vector cassette. Some LV preparations induced only mild sporadic changes while others had strong effects suggesting that LV batch heterogeneity may be related to the extent of the epigenetic response. These findings identify a previously uncharacterized but consistent cellular response to viral components and provide a novel example of environmentally modified epigenome.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 25%
Researcher 4 20%
Student > Master 3 15%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 5 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Chemical Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 24 August 2016.
All research outputs
#6,392,183
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Epigenetics & Chromatin
#261
of 568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,818
of 354,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Epigenetics & Chromatin
#14
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 568 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 354,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.