↓ Skip to main content

X-linked Inhibitor of Apoptosis Protein Deficiency: More than an X-linked Lymphoproliferative Syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Immunology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
86 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
X-linked Inhibitor of Apoptosis Protein Deficiency: More than an X-linked Lymphoproliferative Syndrome
Published in
Journal of Clinical Immunology, March 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10875-015-0141-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claire Aguilar, Sylvain Latour

Abstract

X-linked inhibitor of apoptosis (XIAP) deficiency (also known as X-linked lymphoproliferative syndrome type 2, XLP-2) is a rare primary immunodeficiency. Since the disease was first described in 2006, more than 70 patients suffering from XIAP-deficiency have been reported, thus extending the clinical presentations of the disease. The main clinical features of XLP-2 are (i) elevated susceptibility to hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH, frequently in response to infection with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)), (ii) recurrent splenomegaly and (iii) inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with the characteristics of Crohn's disease. XIAP deficiency is now considered to be one of the genetic causes of IBD in infancy. Although XIAP is an anti-apoptotic molecule, it is also involved in many other pathways, including the regulation of innate immunity and inflammation. XIAP is required for signaling through the Nod-like receptors NOD1 and 2, which are intracellular sensors of bacterial infection. XIAP-deficient T cells (including innate natural killer T cells and mucosal-associated invariant T cells) are overly sensitive to apoptosis. NOD2 function is impaired in XIAP-deficient monocytes. However, the physiopathological mechanisms underlying the clinical phenotypes in XIAP deficiency, notably the HLH and the EBV susceptibility, are not well understood. Here, we review the clinical aspects, molecular etiology and physiopathology of XIAP deficiency.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
Unknown 80 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 27%
Other 13 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 16%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 12 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 18 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 March 2016.
All research outputs
#13,937,024
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Immunology
#884
of 1,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,616
of 257,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Immunology
#8
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 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 1,557 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 257,855 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.