↓ Skip to main content

HABP2 germline variants are uncommon in familial nonmedullary thyroid cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Genomics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
HABP2 germline variants are uncommon in familial nonmedullary thyroid cancer
Published in
BMC Medical Genomics, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12881-016-0323-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexia L. Weeks, Scott G. Wilson, Lynley Ward, Jack Goldblatt, Jennie Hui, John P. Walsh

Abstract

The genetic basis of nonsyndromic familial nonmedullary thyroid cancer (FNMTC) is poorly understood. A recent study identified HABP2 as a tumor suppressor gene and identified a germline variant (G534E) in an extended FNMTC kindred. The relevance of this to other FNMTC kindreds is uncertain. Sanger sequencing was performed on peripheral blood DNA from probands from 37 Australian FNMTC kindreds to detect the G534E variant. Whole exome data from 59 participants from 20 kindreds were examined for mutations in HABP2 and the thyroid cancer susceptibility genes SRGAP1, NKX2-1, SRRM2 and FOXE1. The population prevalence of the G534E variant in HABP2 was examined in two independent cohorts. Heterozygosity for the G534E variant in HABP2 was found in 1 of 37 probands (2.7 %), but did not cosegregate with disease in this kindred, being absent in the proband's affected sister. From whole exome data, pathogenic mutations were not identified in HABP2, SRGAP1, NKX2-1, SRRM2 or FOXE1. Heterozygosity for the G534E variant in HABP2 was present in 7.6 % of Busselton Health Study participants (N = 4634, unknown disease status) and 9.3 % of TwinsUK participants (N = 1195, no history of thyroid cancer). The G534E variant in HABP2 does not account for the familial nature of NMTC in Australian kindreds, and is common in the general population. Further research is required to elucidate the genetic basis of nonsyndromic FNMTC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 29%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 4 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 14%
Unknown 4 19%
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 17 August 2016.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genomics
#2,010
of 2,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#313,862
of 354,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genomics
#38
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,444 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 354,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.