↓ Skip to main content

X-linked Inhibitor of Apoptosis Complicated by Granulomatous Lymphocytic Interstitial Lung Disease (GLILD) and Granulomatous Hepatitis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Immunology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
X-linked Inhibitor of Apoptosis Complicated by Granulomatous Lymphocytic Interstitial Lung Disease (GLILD) and Granulomatous Hepatitis
Published in
Journal of Clinical Immunology, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10875-016-0320-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cathal L. Steele, Matthew Doré, Sandra Ammann, Maurice Loughrey, Angeles Montero, Siobhan O. Burns, Emma C. Morris, Bobby Gaspar, Kimberly Gilmour, Shahnaz Bibi, Hiba Shendi, Lisa Devlin, Carsten Speckmann, David M. Edgar

Abstract

The X-linked inhibitor of apoptosis (XIAP) deficiency is a primary immunodeficiency characterized by Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-driven hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH), splenomegaly, and colitis. Here, we present, for the first time, granulomatous hepatitis and granulomatous and lymphocytic interstitial lung disease (GLILD) as manifestations of XIAP deficiency. We report successful treatment of GLILD in XIAP deficiency with rituximab and azathioprine and discuss the role of XIAP deficiency in immune dysregulation.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 35 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 19%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 31%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 12 33%
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 16 March 2018.
All research outputs
#18,541,268
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Immunology
#1,137
of 1,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,710
of 367,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Immunology
#15
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 367,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.