↓ Skip to main content

Plasma Cell-Free DNA Predicts Survival and Maps Specific Sources of Injury in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension

Overview of attention for article published in Circulation, August 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
42 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
27 X users

Readers on

mendeley
30 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.
Article details
Title
Plasma Cell-Free DNA Predicts Survival and Maps Specific Sources of Injury in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension
Published in
Circulation, August 2022
DOI 10.1161/circulationaha.121.056719
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is a noninvasive marker of cellular injury. Its significance in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is unknown. Plasma cfDNA was measured in 2 PAH cohorts (A, n=48; B, n=161) and controls (n=48). Data were collected for REVEAL 2.0 (Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term PAH Disease Management) scores and outcome determinations. Patients were divided into the following REVEAL risk groups: low (≤6), medium (7-8), and high (≥9). Total cfDNA concentrations were compared among controls and PAH risk groups by 1-way analysis of variance. Log-rank tests compared survival between cfDNA tertiles and REVEAL risk groups. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were estimated from logistic regression models. A sample subset from cohort B (n=96) and controls (n=16) underwent bisulfite sequencing followed by a deconvolution algorithm to map cell-specific cfDNA methylation patterns, with concentrations compared using t tests. In cohort A, median (interquartile range) age was 62 years (47-71), 75% female, versus 6 (4-9) in REVEAL 2.0. In cohort B, median (interquartile range) age was 59 years (49-71), 69% female, versus 7 (6-9) in REVEAL 2.0. In both cohorts, cfDNA concentrations differed among patients with PAH of varying REVEAL risk and controls (analysis of variance P≤0.002) and were greater in the high-risk compared with the low-risk category (P≤0.002). In cohort B, death or lung transplant occurred in 14 of 54, 23 of 53, and 35 of 54 patients in the lowest, middle, and highest cfDNA tertiles, respectively. cfDNA levels stratified as tertiles (log-rank: P=0.0001) and REVEAL risk groups (log-rank: P<0.0001) each predicted transplant-free survival. The addition of cfDNA to REVEAL improved discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.72-0.78; P=0.02). Compared with controls, methylation analysis in patients with PAH revealed increased cfDNA originating from erythrocyte progenitors, neutrophils, monocytes, adipocytes, natural killer cells, vascular endothelium, and cardiac myocytes (Bonferroni adjusted P<0.05). cfDNA concentrations derived from erythrocyte progenitor cells, cardiac myocytes, and vascular endothelium were greater in patients with PAH with high-risk versus low-risk REVEAL scores (P≤0.02). Circulating cfDNA is elevated in patients with PAH, correlates with disease severity, and predicts worse survival. Results from cfDNA methylation analyses in patients with PAH are consistent with prevailing paradigms of disease pathogenesis.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

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.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Student > Master 2 7%
Researcher 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 14 47%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 15 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 336. 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 08 June 2023.
All research outputs
#123,088
of 34,306,620 outputs
Outputs from Circulation
#437
of 28,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,161
of 454,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Circulation
#15
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,306,620 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 28,294 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 454,619 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.