↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Autoimmune destruction of pericytes as the cause of diabetic retinopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Autoimmune destruction of pericytes as the cause of diabetic retinopathy
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, June 2008
DOI 10.2147/opth.s2629
Pubmed ID
Authors

Duncan D Adams

Abstract

In diabetic retinopathy, collapse of the retinal vasculature is associated with loss of the pericytes. These are contractile cells that together with endothelial cells form the terminal arterioles of the retina. The cause of the loss of pericytes is not known. Recently, it has been discovered that type 1 diabetes is caused by forbidden clones of cytotoxic T lymphocytes, which destroy the insulin-making cells with exquisite specificity. In the light of this, I postulate that an antigenically-related forbidden clone of cytotoxic T lymphocytes selectively destroys the pericytes and that this is the cause of the vascular collapse of diabetic retinopathy. If this is so, the therapeutic implications are immense, involving a switch from ineffectual tight glycemic control to immunotherapy. This is already used as immunosuppression to prevent organ transplant rejection, and as the immune ablation and autologous bone marrow cell reconstitution that has saved the lives of patients with lethally-severe scleroderma. Once the pericyte surface auto-antigen for the T lymphocytes has been isolated, selective destruction of the pathogenic T lymphocytes would be possible by manufacture and use of cytotoxic auto-antigen complexes, which arrests progression of the retinopathy.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 4%
Unknown 25 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 27%
Student > Postgraduate 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 7 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 September 2015.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#820
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,974
of 97,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 97,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.