↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of Varicella-Zoster Virus in Temporal Arteries Biopsy Positive and Negative for Giant Cell Arteritis

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Neurology, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
28 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Analysis of Varicella-Zoster Virus in Temporal Arteries Biopsy Positive and Negative for Giant Cell Arteritis
Published in
JAMA Neurology, November 2015
DOI 10.1001/jamaneurol.2015.2101
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria A. Nagel, Teresa White, Nelly Khmeleva, April Rempel, Philip J. Boyer, Jeffrey L. Bennett, Andrea Haller, Kelly Lear-Kaul, Balasurbramaniyam Kandasmy, Malena Amato, Edward Wood, Vikram Durairaj, Franz Fogt, Madhura A. Tamhankar, Hans E. Grossniklaus, Robert J. Poppiti, Brian Bockelman, Kathy Keyvani, Lea Pollak, Sonia Mendlovic, Mary Fowkes, Charles G. Eberhart, Mathias Buttmann, Klaus V. Toyka, Tobias Meyer-ter-Vehn, Vigdis Petursdottir, Don Gilden

Abstract

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common systemic vasculitis in elderly individuals. Diagnosis is confirmed by temporal artery (TA) biopsy, although biopsy results are often negative. Despite the use of corticosteroids, disease may progress. Identification of causal agents will improve outcomes. Biopsy-positive GCA is associated with TA infection by varicella-zoster virus (VZV). To analyze VZV infection in TAs of patients with clinically suspected GCA whose TAs were histopathologically negative and in normal TAs removed post mortem from age-matched individuals. A cross-sectional study for VZV antigen was performed from January 2013 to March 2015 using archived, deidentified, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded GCA-negative, GCA-positive, and normal TAs (50 sections/TA) collected during the past 30 years. Regions adjacent to those containing VZV were examined by hematoxylin-eosin staining. Immunohistochemistry identified inflammatory cells and cell types around nerve bundles containing VZV. A combination of 17 tertiary referral centers and private practices worldwide contributed archived TAs from individuals older than 50 years. Presence and distribution of VZV antigen in TAs and histopathological changes in sections adjacent to those containing VZV were confirmed by 2 independent readers. Varicella-zoster virus antigen was found in 45 of 70 GCA-negative TAs (64%), compared with 11 of 49 normal TAs (22%) (relative risk [RR] = 2.86; 95% CI, 1.75-5.31; P < .001). Extension of our earlier study revealed VZV antigen in 68 of 93 GCA-positive TAs (73%), compared with 11 of 49 normal TAs (22%) (RR = 3.26; 95% CI, 2.03-5.98; P < .001). Compared with normal TAs, VZV antigen was more likely to be present in the adventitia of both GCA-negative TAs (RR = 2.43; 95% CI, 1.82-3.41; P < .001) and GCA-positive TAs (RR = 2.03; 95% CI, 1.52-2.86; P < .001). Varicella-zoster virus antigen was frequently found in perineurial cells expressing claudin-1 around nerve bundles. Of 45 GCA-negative participants whose TAs contained VZV antigen, 1 had histopathological features characteristic of GCA, and 16 (36%) showed adventitial inflammation adjacent to viral antigen; no inflammation was seen in normal TAs. In patients with clinically suspected GCA, prevalence of VZV in their TAs is similar independent of whether biopsy results are negative or positive pathologically. Antiviral treatment may confer additional benefit to patients with biopsy-negative GCA treated with corticosteroids, although the optimal antiviral regimen remains to be determined.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 %
Canada 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 80 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 14 17%
Researcher 12 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 22 27%
Unknown 10 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 53%
Neuroscience 6 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 18 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 31 December 2015.
All research outputs
#2,124,095
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Neurology
#1,988
of 5,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,981
of 294,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Neurology
#47
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,840 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 294,808 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.