↓ Skip to main content

Adoptive T Cell Therapy Targeting CD1 and MR1

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
Adoptive T Cell Therapy Targeting CD1 and MR1
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00247
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tingxi Guo, Kenji Chamoto, Naoto Hirano

Abstract

Adoptive T cell immunotherapy has demonstrated clinically relevant efficacy in treating malignant and infectious diseases. However, much of these therapies have been focused on enhancing, or generating de novo, effector functions of conventional T cells recognizing HLA molecules. Given the heterogeneity of HLA alleles, mismatched patients are ineligible for current HLA-restricted adoptive T cell therapies. CD1 and MR1 are class I-like monomorphic molecules and their restricted T cells possess unique T cell receptor specificity against entirely different classes of antigens. CD1 and MR1 molecules present lipid and vitamin B metabolite antigens, respectively, and offer a new front of targets for T cell therapies. This review will cover the recent progress in the basic research of CD1, MR1, and their restricted T cells that possess translational potential.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 5%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 57 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 29%
Researcher 13 21%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Professor 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 31%
Immunology and Microbiology 16 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Chemistry 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 7 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 June 2015.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#22,570
of 31,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,447
of 280,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#125
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 280,276 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.