| Title |
Multiplex quantitative imaging of human myocardial infarction by mass spectrometry-immunohistochemistry
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Legal Medicine, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00414-018-1813-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aleksandra Aljakna, Estelle Lauer, Sébastien Lenglet, Silke Grabherr, Tony Fracasso, Marc Augsburger, Sara Sabatasso, Aurélien Thomas |
| Abstract |
Simultaneous assessment of a panel of protein markers is becoming essential in order to enhance biomarker research and improve diagnostics. Specifically, postmortem diagnostics of early myocardial ischemia in sudden cardiac death cases could benefit from a multiplex marker assessment in the same tissue section. Current analytical antibody-based techniques (immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence) limit multiplex analysis usually to not more than three antibodies. In this study, mass spectrometry-immunohistochemistry (MS-IHC) was performed by combining laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) with rare-metal-isotope-tagged antibodies as a technique for multiplex analysis of human postmortem myocardial tissue samples. Tissue sections with myocardial infarction were simultaneously analyzed for seven primary, rare-metal-isotope-tagged antibodies (troponin T, myoglobin, fibronectin, C5b-9, unphosphorylated connexin 43, VEGF-B, and JunB). Comparison between the MS-IHC approach and chromogenic IHC showed similar patterns in ionic and optical images. In addition, absolute quantification was performed by MS-IHC, providing a proportional relationship between the signal intensity and the local marker concentration in tissue sections. These data demonstrated that LA-ICP-MS combined with rare-metal-isotope-tagged antibodies is an efficient strategy for simultaneous testing of multiple markers and allows not only visualization of molecules within the tissue but also quantification of the signal. Such imaging approach has a great potential in both diagnostics and pathology-related research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 20% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,096,200
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#748
of 2,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,041
of 332,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#10
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,088 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 332,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.