↓ Skip to main content

Testing a Multivariate Proteomic Panel for Traumatic Brain Injury Biomarker Discovery: A TRACK-TBI Pilot Study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurotrauma, December 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Testing a Multivariate Proteomic Panel for Traumatic Brain Injury Biomarker Discovery: A TRACK-TBI Pilot Study
Published in
Journal of Neurotrauma, December 2018
DOI 10.1089/neu.2017.5449
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Russell Huie, Ramon Diaz-Arrastia, John K. Yue, Marco D. Sorani, Ava M. Puccio, David O. Okonkwo, Geoffrey T. Manley, Adam R. Ferguson, Opeolu M. Adeoye, Neeraj Badjatia, Kimberly D. Boase, Yelena Bodien-Guller, Malcolm R. Bullock, Randall M. Chesnut, John D. Corrigan, Karen L. Crawford, Ramon Diaz-Arrastia, Sureyya S. Dikmen, Ann-Christine Duhaime, Richard G. Ellenbogen, Frank Ezekiel, Venkata R. Feeser, Joseph T. Giacino, Dana P. Goldman, Luis Gonzales, Shankar P. Gopinath, Rao P. Gullapalli, Jesse C. Hemphill, Gillian A. Hotz, Joel H. Kramer, Harvey Levin, Christopher J. Lindsell, Joan Machamer, Christopher Madden, Amy J. Markowitz, Alastair Martin, Bruce E. Mathern, Thomas W. McAllister, Michael A. McCrea, Randall E. Merchant, Florence Noel, Daniel P. Perl, Ava M. Puccio, Miri Rabinowitz, Claudia S. Robertson, Jonathan Rosand, Angelle M. Sander, Gabriela Satris, David M. Schnyer, Seth A. Seabury, Paulina Sergot, Mark Sherer, Deborah M. Stein, Murray B. Stein, Sabrina R. Taylor, Nancy R. Temkin, Arthur W. Toga, L. Christine Turtzo, Paul M. Vespa, Kevin K. Wang, Ross Zafonte, Zhiqun Zhang

Abstract

The complex and heterogeneous nature of traumatic brain injury (TBI) has rendered the identification of diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers elusive. A single acute biomarker may not be sufficient to categorize injury severity and/or predict outcome. Using multivariate dimension reduction analyses, we tested the sensitivity and specificity of a multianalyte panel of proteins as an ensemble biomarker for TBI. Serum was collected within 24 hours of injury in a cohort of 130 patients enrolled in the multicenter prospective Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Pilot (TRACK-TBI Pilot) study and run on an array that measured 72 proteins. Using unsupervised principal components analysis, we first identified the subset of protein changes accounting for the most variance across patients. This yielded a group of 21 proteins that reflected an inverse relationship between inflammatory cytokines and regulators of anti-inflammation, and generated an individual inflammatory profile score for each patient. We then tested the association between these scores and computed tomography (CT) findings at hospital admission, as well as their prognostic association with functional recovery at 3 and 6 months (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended), and cognitive recovery at 6 months (California Verbal Learning Test, Second Edition) after injury. Inflammatory signatures were significantly increased in patients with positive CT findings, as well as in those that showed poor or incomplete recovery. Inflammation biomarker scores also showed significant sensitivity and specificity as a discriminator of these outcome measures (all AUCs > 0.62). This proof-of-concept for the feasibility of multivariate biomarker identification demonstrates the prognostic validity of using a proteomic panel as a potential biomarker for TBI.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Professor 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 26 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 16 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 19%
Psychology 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 33 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 March 2020.
All research outputs
#29,153,601
of 32,296,133 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurotrauma
#2,956
of 3,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#416,751
of 474,648 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurotrauma
#30
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,296,133 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,174 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 474,648 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.