| Title |
Common variants in MMP20 at 11q22.2 predispose to 11q deletion and neuroblastoma risk
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41467-017-00408-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiao Chang, Yan Zhao, Cuiping Hou, Joseph Glessner, Lee McDaniel, Maura A. Diamond, Kelly Thomas, Jin Li, Zhi Wei, Yichuan Liu, Yiran Guo, Frank D. Mentch, Haijun Qiu, Cecilia Kim, Perry Evans, Zalman Vaksman, Sharon J. Diskin, Edward F. Attiyeh, Patrick Sleiman, John M. Maris, Hakon Hakonarson |
| Abstract |
MYCN amplification and 11q deletion are two inversely correlated prognostic factors of poor outcome in neuroblastoma. Here we identify common variants at 11q22.2 within MMP20 that associate with neuroblastoma cases harboring 11q deletion (rs10895322), using GWAS in 113 European-American cases and 5109 ancestry-matched controls. The association is replicated in 44 independent cases and 1902 controls. Our study yields novel insights into the genetic underpinnings of neuroblastoma, demonstrating that the inherited common variants reported contribute to the origin of intra-tumor genetic heterogeneity in neuroblastoma.Chromosomal abnormalities such as 11q deletion are associated with poor prognosis in neuroblastoma. Here, the authors perform a genome-wide association study and identify an association between a variant within a Matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) gene member, MMP20, and 11q-deletion subtype neuroblastoma. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Researcher | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 70. 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 29 September 2017.
All research outputs
#525,252
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#9,257
of 47,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,294
of 318,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#236
of 1,071 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 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 47,352 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 318,311 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,071 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.