↓ Skip to main content

Identification of a Novel Mutation in MAGT1 and Progressive Multifocal Leucoencephalopathy in a 58-Year-Old Man with XMEN Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Immunology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
Identification of a Novel Mutation in MAGT1 and Progressive Multifocal Leucoencephalopathy in a 58-Year-Old Man with XMEN Disease
Published in
Journal of Clinical Immunology, December 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10875-014-0116-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fatima Dhalla, Sarah Murray, Ross Sadler, Benjamin Chaigne-Delalande, Tomohiko Sadaoka, Elizabeth Soilleux, Gulbu Uzel, Joanne Miller, Graham Peter Collins, Christian Simon Ross Hatton, Malini Bhole, Berne Ferry, Helen M. Chapel, Jeffrey I. Cohen, Smita Y. Patel

Abstract

XMEN disease (X-linked immunodeficiency with Magnesium defect, Epstein-Barr virus infection and Neoplasia) is a novel primary immune deficiency caused by mutations in MAGT1 and characterised by chronic infection with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), EBV-driven lymphoma, CD4 T-cell lymphopenia, and dysgammaglobulinemia [1]. Functional studies have demonstrated roles for magnesium as a second messenger in T-cell receptor signalling [1], and for NKG2D expression and consequently NK- and CD8 T-cell cytotoxicity [2]. 7 patients have been described in the literature; the oldest died at 45 years and was diagnosed posthumously [1-3]. We present the case of a 58-year-old Caucasian gentleman with a novel mutation in MAGT1 with the aim of adding to the phenotype of this newly described disease by detailing his clinical course over more than 20 years.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Other 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 11 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 07 March 2015.
All research outputs
#17,734,890
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Immunology
#1,062
of 1,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,988
of 354,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Immunology
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,556 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 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 354,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 52% of its contemporaries.