| Title |
Association between a common immunoglobulin heavy chain allele and rheumatic heart disease risk in Oceania
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ncomms14946 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tom Parks, Mariana M. Mirabel, Joseph Kado, Kathryn Auckland, Jaroslaw Nowak, Anna Rautanen, Alexander J. Mentzer, Eloi Marijon, Xavier Jouven, Mai Ling Perman, Tuliana Cua, John K. Kauwe, John B. Allen, Henry Taylor, Kathryn J. Robson, Charlotte M. Deane, Andrew C. Steer, Adrian V. S. Hill |
| Abstract |
The indigenous populations of the South Pacific experience a high burden of rheumatic heart disease (RHD). Here we report a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of RHD susceptibility in 2,852 individuals recruited in eight Oceanian countries. Stratifying by ancestry, we analysed genotyped and imputed variants in Melanesians (607 cases and 1,229 controls) before follow-up of suggestive loci in three further ancestral groups: Polynesians, South Asians and Mixed or other populations (totalling 399 cases and 617 controls). We identify a novel susceptibility signal in the immunoglobulin heavy chain (IGH) locus centring on a haplotype of nonsynonymous variants in the IGHV4-61 gene segment corresponding to the IGHV4-61*02 allele. We show each copy of IGHV4-61*02 is associated with a 1.4-fold increase in the risk of RHD (odds ratio 1.43, 95% confidence intervals 1.27-1.61, P=4.1 × 10(-9)). These findings provide new insight into the role of germline variation in the IGH locus in disease susceptibility. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 16% |
| Switzerland | 3 | 12% |
| Sweden | 2 | 8% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| India | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 60% |
| Scientists | 8 | 32% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 93 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Unknown | 20 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. 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 22 May 2020.
All research outputs
#724,929
of 24,294,766 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#12,304
of 51,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,472
of 314,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#321
of 1,024 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,294,766 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 51,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 314,643 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,024 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.