↓ Skip to main content

Role of T Cell Receptor Affinity in the Efficacy and Specificity of Adoptive T Cell Therapies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
patent
9 patents

Readers on

mendeley
188 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
Role of T Cell Receptor Affinity in the Efficacy and Specificity of Adoptive T Cell Therapies
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2013.00244
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer D. Stone, David M. Kranz

Abstract

Over the last several years, there has been considerable progress in the treatment of cancer using gene modified adoptive T cell therapies. Two approaches have been used, one involving the introduction of a conventional αβ T cell receptor (TCR) against a pepMHC cancer antigen, and the second involving introduction of a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) consisting of a single-chain antibody as an Fv fragment linked to transmembrane and signaling domains. In this review, we focus on one aspect of TCR-mediated adoptive T cell therapies, the impact of the affinity of the αβ TCR for the pepMHC cancer antigen on both efficacy and specificity. We discuss the advantages of higher-affinity TCRs in mediating potent activity of CD4 T cells. This is balanced with the potential disadvantage of higher-affinity TCRs in mediating greater self-reactivity against a wider range of structurally similar antigenic peptides, especially in synergy with the CD8 co-receptor. Both TCR affinity and target selection will influence potential safety issues. We suggest pre-clinical strategies that might be used to examine each TCR for possible on-target and off-target side effects due to self-reactivities, and to adjust TCR affinities accordingly.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 184 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 48 26%
Researcher 30 16%
Student > Bachelor 21 11%
Student > Master 19 10%
Other 8 4%
Other 26 14%
Unknown 36 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 46 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 33 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 30 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 12%
Chemistry 7 4%
Other 13 7%
Unknown 36 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 05 July 2023.
All research outputs
#2,689,770
of 26,238,332 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#2,746
of 32,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,128
of 293,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#25
of 503 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,238,332 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,886 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 293,819 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 503 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.