↓ Skip to main content

Renal biomarkers predict nephrotoxicity after paraquat

Overview of attention for article published in Toxicology Letters, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
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.
Title
Renal biomarkers predict nephrotoxicity after paraquat
Published in
Toxicology Letters, August 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.toxlet.2013.08.003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Klintean Wunnapuk, Xin Liu, Philip Peake, Glenda Gobe, Zoltan Endre, Jeffrey E. Grice, Michael S. Roberts, Nicholas A. Buckley

Abstract

Paraquat is a widely used herbicide which has been involved in many accidental and intentional deaths. Nephrotoxicity is common in severe acute paraquat poisoning. We examined seven renal injury biomarkers, including cystatin-C, kidney injury molecule-1, β2-microglobulin, clusterin, albumin, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin and osteopontin, to develop a non-invasive method to detect early renal damage and dysfunction and to compare with the conventional endogenous marker creatinine. Male Wistar rats were dosed orally with four different doses of paraquat, and the biomarker patterns in urine and plasma were investigated at 8, 24 and 48h after paraquat exposure. By Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis, urinary kidney injury molecule-1 was the best marker at predicting histological changes, with areas under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve of 0.81 and 0.98 at 8 and 24h (best cut-off value>0.000326μg/ml), respectively. Urinary kidney injury molecule-1, urinary albumin and urinary Cystatin-C elevations correlated with the degree of renal damage and injury development. Further study is required to compare biomarkers changes in rats with those seen in human poisoning.

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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 51 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 9 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 12 23%
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 30 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Toxicology Letters
#3,044
of 3,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,755
of 207,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Toxicology Letters
#23
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,691 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 207,923 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.