↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Inhibition of myeloid differentiation factor 88 signaling mediated by histidine-grafted poly(β-amino ester) ester nanovector induces donor-specific liver allograft tolerance

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
Title
Inhibition of myeloid differentiation factor 88 signaling mediated by histidine-grafted poly(β-amino ester) ester nanovector induces donor-specific liver allograft tolerance
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2015
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s81413
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fanguo Hu, Hanjie Wang, Shuangnan Zhang, Yao Peng, Lin Su, Jin Chang, Gang Liu

Abstract

Toll-like receptors (TLRs) activate biochemical pathways that evoke activation of innate immunity, which leads to dendritic cell maturation and initiation of adaptive immune responses that provoke allograft rejection. We aimed to prolong allograft survival by selectively inhibiting expression of myeloid differentiation factor 88 (MyD88), which is an essential adaptor in TLR signaling. We designed and synthesized a novel histidine-grafted poly(β-amino ester) (HGPAE) nanovector, which was shown to be safe and efficient both in vitro and in vivo for the delivery of a plasmid containing shRNA targeting MyD88 (pMyD88). We also demonstrated that the pMyD88/HGPAE complex mediated remarkable inhibition of MyD88 expression in rat liver in vivo. We transplanted Dark Agouti rat livers lacking MyD88 as result of transfection with the pMyD88/HGPAE complex into Lewis rats. The recipients survived longer and graft rejection of the donor liver as well as serum levels of IL-2 and IFN-γ in the recipient were significantly reduced.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Researcher 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 1 14%
Chemistry 1 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Unknown 4 57%
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 02 April 2016.
All research outputs
#14,387,928
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,492
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,750
of 277,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#26
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 277,610 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.