| Title |
Plasma lipidomics as a diagnostic tool for peroxisomal disorders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10545-017-0114-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katharina Herzog, Mia L. Pras‐Raves, Sacha Ferdinandusse, Martin A. T. Vervaart, Angela C. M. Luyf, Antoine H. C. van Kampen, Ronald J. A. Wanders, Hans R. Waterham, Frédéric M. Vaz |
| Abstract |
Peroxisomes are ubiquitous cell organelles that play an important role in lipid metabolism. Accordingly, peroxisomal disorders, including the peroxisome biogenesis disorders and peroxisomal single-enzyme deficiencies, are associated with aberrant lipid metabolism. Lipidomics is an emerging tool for diagnosis, disease-monitoring, identifying lipid biomarkers, and studying the underlying pathophysiology in disorders of lipid metabolism. In this study, we demonstrate the potential of lipidomics for the diagnosis of peroxisomal disorders using plasma samples from patients with different types of peroxisomal disorders. We show that the changes in the plasma profiles of phospholipids, di- and triglycerides, and cholesterol esters correspond with the characteristic metabolite abnormalities that are currently used in the metabolic screening for peroxisomal disorders. The lipidomics approach, however, gives a much more detailed overview of the metabolic changes that occur in the lipidome. Furthermore, we identified novel unique lipid species for specific peroxisomal diseases that are candidate biomarkers. The results presented in this paper show the power of lipidomics approaches to enable the specific diagnosis of different peroxisomal disorders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 2 | 25% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 60 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 12% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 18 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 March 2020.
All research outputs
#6,230,739
of 23,642,687 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease
#493
of 1,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,845
of 442,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,642,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,894 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 442,499 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.