The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cytokine-Induced Killer Cells As Pharmacological Tools for Cancer Immunotherapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00774 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xingchun Gao, Yajing Mi, Na Guo, Hao Xu, Lixian Xu, Xingchun Gou, Weilin Jin |
| Abstract |
Cytokine-induced killer (CIK) cells are a heterogeneous population of effector CD3(+)CD56(+) natural killer T cells, which can be easily expanded in vitro from peripheral blood mononuclear cells. CIK cells work as pharmacological tools for cancer immunotherapy as they exhibit MHC-unrestricted, safe, and effective antitumor activity. Much effort has been made to improve CIK cells cytotoxicity and treatments of CIK cells combined with other antitumor therapies are applied. This review summarizes some strategies, including the combination of CIK with additional cytokines, dendritic cells, check point inhibitors, antibodies, chemotherapeutic agents, nanomedicines, and engineering CIK cells with a chimeric antigen receptor. Furthermore, we briefly sum up the clinical trials on CIK cells and compare the effect of clinical CIK therapy with other immunotherapies. Finally, further research is needed to clarify the pharmacological mechanism of CIK and provide evidence to formulate uniform culturing criteria for CIK expansion. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 71% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 138 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 26 | 19% |
| Unknown | 48 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 29 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 16% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Unknown | 52 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 22 September 2022.
All research outputs
#3,711,488
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#4,153
of 31,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,175
of 326,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#62
of 405 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 326,018 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 405 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.