↓ Skip to main content

Monoclonal B lymphocytosis and minimal change disease: a new monoclonal B-cell disorder of renal significance?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nephrology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 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
Monoclonal B lymphocytosis and minimal change disease: a new monoclonal B-cell disorder of renal significance?
Published in
Journal of Nephrology, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40620-017-0464-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margaux Van Wynsberghe, Pascal Lenain, Fanny Drieux, Dominique Guerrot, Dominique Bertrand

Abstract

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) may induce renal complications, which are becoming increasingly common, but in this context the occurrence of minimal change disease (MCD) remains rare. Monoclonal B lymphocytosis (MBL) is a precursor state of CLL and is currently under recognized. Since MBL is seen as a benign disorder that rarely evolves into CLL, screening for MBL is not standardized and does not require any treatment. When reviewing renal disease associated with MBL, there is very scant data in the literature and to date there is no case describing the association between MBL and MCD. Here, we describe the case of a 71-year old woman admitted for nephrotic syndrome (NS). We diagnosed a MBL. Kidney biopsy revealed MCD. Treatment with corticosteroids was introduced but no improvement was observed. Chemotherapy with rituximab and chlorambucil was thus started, leading to complete remission of both MBL and MCD. To our knowledge, this is the first description of the association of MBL and MCD. This case suggests that screening for MBL may have unexpected diagnostic and therapeutic implications in patients presenting with seemingly idiopathic NS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 25%
Student > Bachelor 1 13%
Librarian 1 13%
Student > Master 1 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 13%
Unknown 4 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 December 2017.
All research outputs
#13,430,937
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nephrology
#437
of 1,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,371
of 447,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nephrology
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 447,665 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.