↓ Skip to main content

Brief review: cell replacement therapies to treat type 1 diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Diabetes and Endocrinology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Brief review: cell replacement therapies to treat type 1 diabetes mellitus
Published in
Clinical Diabetes and Endocrinology, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40842-016-0023-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alberto Hayek, Charles C. King

Abstract

Human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and induced pluripotent cells (iPSCs) have the potential to differentiate into any somatic cell, making them ideal candidates for cell replacement therapies to treat a number of human diseases and regenerate damaged or non-functional tissues and organs. Key to the promise of regenerative medicine is developing standardized protocols that can safely be applied in patients. Progress towards this goal has occurred in a number of fields, including type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D). During the past 10 years, significant technological advances in hESC/iPSC biochemistry have provided a roadmap to generate sufficient quantities of glucose-responsive, insulin-producing cells capable of eliminating diabetes in rodents. Although many of the molecular mechanisms underlying the genesis of these cells remain to be elucidated, the field of cell-based therapeutics to treat T1D has advanced to the point where the first Phase I/II trials in humans have begun. Here, we provide a concise review of the history of cell replacement therapies to treat T1D from islet transplantations and xenotranplantation, to current work in hESC/iPSC. We also highlight the latest advances in efforts to employ insulin-producing, glucose-responsive β-like cells derived from hESC as therapeutics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 28%
Student > Bachelor 8 25%
Student > Master 5 16%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 25%
Engineering 4 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 19%
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 09 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,713,318
of 22,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Diabetes and Endocrinology
#43
of 81 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,067
of 298,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Diabetes and Endocrinology
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 81 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 298,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.