↓ Skip to main content

Use of genomic and functional analysis to characterize patients with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Nephrology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Use of genomic and functional analysis to characterize patients with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00467-018-3995-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas M. Kitzler, Nadezda Kachurina, Martin M. Bitzan, Elena Torban, Paul R. Goodyer

Abstract

Children with genetic causes of steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome (SRNS) usually do well after renal transplantation, while some with idiopathic SRNS show recurrence due to a putative podocyte-toxic factor. Distinguishing different forms of SRNS based on clinical criteria has been difficult. The aim of our study was to test a novel approach that allows categorization of patients into clinically useful subgroups. Seventeen patients with clinically confirmed SRNS were analyzed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) of 37 known SRNS genes and a functional assay of cultured human podocytes, which indirectly tests for toxicity of patients' sera by evidenced loss of podocyte focal adhesion complex (FAC) number. We identified a pathogenic mutation in seven patients (41%). Sera from patients with monogenic SRNS caused mild loss of FAC number down to 73% compared to untreated controls, while sera from seven of the remaining ten patients with idiopathic SRNS caused significant FAC number loss to 43% (non-overlapping difference 30%, 95% CI 26-36%, P < 0.001). All patients with recurrent SRNS (n = 4) in the graft showed absence of podocyte gene mutations but significant FAC loss. Three patients had no mutation nor serum podocyte toxicity. Our approach allowed categorization of patients into three subgroups: (1) patients with monogenic SRNS; (2) patients with idiopathic SRNS and marked serum podocyte toxicity; and (3) patients without identifiable genetic cause nor evidence of serum podocyte toxicity. Post-transplant SRNS recurrence risk appears to be low in groups 1 and 3, but high in group 2.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Professor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 7 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Psychology 1 5%
Unknown 11 58%
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 24 September 2018.
All research outputs
#15,012,809
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#2,599
of 3,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,002
of 327,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#64
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,596 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 327,720 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.