↓ Skip to main content

Development of an objective gene expression panel as an alternative to self-reported symptom scores in human influenza challenge trials

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Development of an objective gene expression panel as an alternative to self-reported symptom scores in human influenza challenge trials
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12967-017-1235-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julius Muller, Eneida Parizotto, Richard Antrobus, James Francis, Campbell Bunce, Amanda Stranks, Marshall Nichols, Micah McClain, Adrian V. S. Hill, Adaikalavan Ramasamy, Sarah C. Gilbert

Abstract

Influenza challenge trials are important for vaccine efficacy testing. Currently, disease severity is determined by self-reported scores to a list of symptoms which can be highly subjective. A more objective measure would allow for improved data analysis. Twenty-one volunteers participated in an influenza challenge trial. We calculated the daily sum of scores (DSS) for a list of 16 influenza symptoms. Whole blood collected at baseline and 24, 48, 72 and 96 h post challenge was profiled on Illumina HT12v4 microarrays. Changes in gene expression most strongly correlated with DSS were selected to train a Random Forest model and tested on two independent test sets consisting of 41 individuals profiled on a different microarray platform and 33 volunteers assayed by qRT-PCR. 1456 probes are significantly associated with DSS at 1% false discovery rate. We selected 19 genes with the largest fold change to train a random forest model. We observed good concordance between predicted and actual scores in the first test set (r = 0.57; RMSE = -16.1%) with the greatest agreement achieved on samples collected approximately 72 h post challenge. Therefore, we assayed samples collected at baseline and 72 h post challenge in the second test set by qRT-PCR and observed good concordance (r = 0.81; RMSE = -36.1%). We developed a 19-gene qRT-PCR panel to predict DSS, validated on two independent datasets. A transcriptomics based panel could provide a more objective measure of symptom scoring in future influenza challenge studies. Trial registration Samples were obtained from a clinical trial with the ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02014870, first registered on December 5, 2013.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 42%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 7 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 April 2023.
All research outputs
#7,582,018
of 23,770,218 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,228
of 4,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,725
of 318,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#28
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,770,218 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 318,596 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.