↓ Skip to main content

Role of C-Reactive Protein at Sites of Inflammation and Infection

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
45 news outlets
twitter
26 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
1947 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2943 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 C-Reactive Protein at Sites of Inflammation and Infection
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00754
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola R. Sproston, Jason J. Ashworth

Abstract

C-reactive protein (CRP) is an acute inflammatory protein that increases up to 1,000-fold at sites of infection or inflammation. CRP is produced as a homopentameric protein, termed native CRP (nCRP), which can irreversibly dissociate at sites of inflammation and infection into five separate monomers, termed monomeric CRP (mCRP). CRP is synthesized primarily in liver hepatocytes but also by smooth muscle cells, macrophages, endothelial cells, lymphocytes, and adipocytes. Evidence suggests that estrogen in the form of hormone replacement therapy influences CRP levels in the elderly. Having been traditionally utilized as a marker of infection and cardiovascular events, there is now growing evidence that CRP plays important roles in inflammatory processes and host responses to infection including the complement pathway, apoptosis, phagocytosis, nitric oxide (NO) release, and the production of cytokines, particularly interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α. Unlike more recent publications, the findings of early work on CRP can seem somewhat unclear and at times conflicting since it was often not specified which particular CRP isoform was measured or utilized in experiments and whether responses attributed to nCRP were in fact possibly due to dissociation into mCRP or lipopolysaccharide contamination. In addition, since antibodies for mCRP are not commercially available, few laboratories are able to conduct studies investigating the mCRP isoform. Despite these issues and the fact that most CRP research to date has focused on vascular disorders, there is mounting evidence that CRP isoforms have distinct biological properties, with nCRP often exhibiting more anti-inflammatory activities compared to mCRP. The nCRP isoform activates the classical complement pathway, induces phagocytosis, and promotes apoptosis. On the other hand, mCRP promotes the chemotaxis and recruitment of circulating leukocytes to areas of inflammation and can delay apoptosis. The nCRP and mCRP isoforms work in opposing directions to inhibit and induce NO production, respectively. In terms of pro-inflammatory cytokine production, mCRP increases interleukin-8 and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 production, whereas nCRP has no detectable effect on their levels. Further studies are needed to expand on these emerging findings and to fully characterize the differential roles that each CRP isoform plays at sites of local inflammation and infection.

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 profiles of 26 X users 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 2,943 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 2943 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 440 15%
Student > Master 283 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 213 7%
Other 153 5%
Student > Postgraduate 153 5%
Other 404 14%
Unknown 1297 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 572 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 266 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 132 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 112 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 85 3%
Other 388 13%
Unknown 1388 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 352. 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 21 February 2024.
All research outputs
#98,317
of 26,629,129 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#112
of 33,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,294
of 346,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#3
of 692 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,629,129 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,429 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 346,492 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 692 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 99% of its contemporaries.