↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Variability in contrast agent uptake by different but similar stem cell types
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2013
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s51588
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashwini Ketkar-Atre, Tom Struys, Stefaan J Soenen, Ivo Lambrichts, Catherine M Verfaillie, Marcel De Cuyper, Uwe Himmelreich

Abstract

The need to track and evaluate the fate of transplanted cells is an important issue in regenerative medicine. In order to accomplish this, pre-labelling cells with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agents is a well-established method. Uptake of MRI contrast agents by non-phagocytic stem cells, and factors such as cell homeostasis or the adverse effects of contrast agents on cell biology have been extensively studied, but in the context of nanoparticle (NP)-specific parameters. Here, we have studied three different types of NPs (Endorem®, magnetoliposomes [MLs], and citrate coated C-200) to label relatively larger, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and, much smaller yet faster proliferating, multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPCs). Both cell types are similar, as they are isolated from bone marrow and have substantial regenerative potential, which make them interesting candidates for comparative experiments. Using NPs with different surface coatings and sizes, we found that differences in the proliferative and morphological characteristics of the cells used in the study are mainly responsible for the fate of endocytosed iron, intracellular iron concentration, and cytotoxic responses. The quantitative analysis, using high-resolution electron microscopy images, demonstrated a strong relationship between cell volume/surface, uptake, and cytotoxicity. Interestingly, uptake and toxicity trends are reversed if intracellular concentrations, and not amounts, are considered. This indicates that more attention should be paid to cellular parameters such as cell size and proliferation rate in comparative cell-labeling studies.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Germany 1 4%
Austria 1 4%
Unknown 24 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 32%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Other 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 25%
Neuroscience 3 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Other 8 29%
Unknown 3 11%
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 29 November 2013.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,087
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,836
of 226,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#48
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 226,646 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.