This paper aims to present an overview of MICA and natural killer group 2 member D (NKG2D) genetic and functional interactions and their impact on kidney transplant outcome. Organ transplantation has gone from what can accurately be called a "clinical experiment" to a routine and reliable practice, which has proven to be clinically relevant, life-saving and cost-effective when compared with non-transplantation management strategies of both chronic and acute end-stage organ failures. The kidney is the most frequently transplanted organ in the world (transplant-observatory). The two treatment options for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are dialysis and/or transplantation. Compared with dialysis, transplantation is associated with significant improvements in quality of life and overall longevity. A strong relationship exists between allograft loss and human leukocyte antigens (HLA) antibodies (Abs). HLA Abs are not the only factor involved in graft loss, as multiple studies have shown that non-HLA antigens are also involved, even when a patient has a good HLA matche and receives standard immunosuppressive therapy. A deeper understanding of other biomarkers is therefore important, as it is likely to lead to better monitoring (and consequent success) of organ transplants. The objective is to fill the void left by extensive reviews that do not often dive this deep into the importance of MICA and NKG2D in allograft acceptance and their partnership in the immune response. There are few papers that explore the relationship between these two protagonists when it comes to kidney transplantation. This is especially true for the role of NKG2D in kidney transplantation. These reasons give a special importance to this review, which aims to be a helpful tool in the hands of researchers in this field.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
2
4%
Other
4
8%
Unknown
12
24%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 March 2017.
All research outputs
#17,239,390
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#20,133
of 31,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,071
of 325,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#336
of 433 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,531 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 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 325,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 433 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
