↓ Skip to main content

The cytokine profile of human NKT cells and PBMCs is dependent on donor sex and stimulus

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Microbiology & Immunology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
The cytokine profile of human NKT cells and PBMCs is dependent on donor sex and stimulus
Published in
Medical Microbiology & Immunology, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00430-016-0449-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah Bernin, Helena Fehling, Claudia Marggraff, Egbert Tannich, Hannelore Lotter

Abstract

Sex-related variations in natural killer T (NKT) cells may influence immunoregulation and outcome of infectious and autoimmune diseases. We analyzed sex-specific differences in peripheral blood NKTs and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from men and women and determined the frequencies of NKT cells and their subpopulations [CD4(+); CD8(+); double negative (DN)] and the levels of cytokine production following stimulation with the NKT cell ligands α-Galactosylceramide (αGalCer) and Entamoeba histolytica lipopeptidephosphoglycan (Lotter et al. in PLoS Pathog 5(5):e1000434, 2009). Total and DN NKT cells were more abundant in women than in men. In women, αGalCer induced higher production of intracellular IFNγ, IL-4, IL-17 and TNF by CD4(+) and DN(+)NKT cells. Both ligands induced expression of multiple cytokines in PBMCs and influenced the ratio of NKT cell subpopulations during long-term culture. Although the sex-specific differences in frequencies of NKT cells and their subpopulations were marginal, the significant sex-specific differences in cytokine production might influence disease outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Unspecified 5 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 17%
Student > Master 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Other 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 6 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 17%
Other 3 10%

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 29 February 2016.
All research outputs
#7,339,382
of 12,225,829 outputs
Outputs from Medical Microbiology & Immunology
#227
of 366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,139
of 290,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Microbiology & Immunology
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,225,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 366 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 290,857 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.