↓ Skip to main content

Antigen Presentation by MHC-Dressed Cells

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
121 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 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
Antigen Presentation by MHC-Dressed Cells
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00672
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masafumi Nakayama

Abstract

Professional antigen-presenting cells (APCs) such as conventional dendritic cells (DCs) process protein antigens to MHC-bound peptides and then present the peptide-MHC complexes to T cells. In addition to this canonical antigen presentation pathway, recent studies have revealed that DCs and non-APCs can acquire MHC class I (MHCI) and/or MHC class II (MHCII) from neighboring cells through a process of cell-cell contact-dependent membrane transfer called trogocytosis. These MHC-dressed cells subsequently activate or regulate T cells via the preformed antigen peptide-MHC complexes without requiring any further processing. In addition to trogocytosis, intercellular transfer of MHCI and MHCII can be mediated by secretion of membrane vesicles such as exosomes from APCs, generating MHC-dressed cells. This review focuses on the physiological role of antigen presentation by MHCI- or MHCII-dressed cells, and also discusses differences and similarities between trogocytosis and exosome-mediated transfer of MHC.

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 3 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 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 198 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 41 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 19%
Student > Master 21 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Student > Bachelor 15 7%
Other 27 13%
Unknown 44 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 33 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 5%
Other 17 8%
Unknown 51 25%
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 15 February 2019.
All research outputs
#15,258,829
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#12,867
of 32,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,198
of 364,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#82
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,231 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 364,635 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.