| Title |
A fast and cost-effective method for apolipoprotein E isotyping as an alternative to APOE genotyping for patient screening and stratification
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41598-018-24320-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Olga Calero, Luis García-Albert, Andrés Rodríguez-Martín, Sergio Veiga, Miguel Calero |
| Abstract |
Apolipoprotein E (apoE) is a 34 kDa glycoprotein involved in lipid metabolism. The human APOE gene encodes for three different apoE protein isoforms: E2, E3 and E4. The interest in apoE isoforms is high for epidemiological research, patient stratification and identification of those at increased risk for clinical trials and prevention. The isoform apoE4 is associated with increased risk for coronary heart and Alzheimer's diseases. This paper describes a method for specifically detecting the apoE4 isoform from biological fluids by taking advantage of the capacity of apoE to bind "specifically" to polystyrene surfaces as capture and a specific anti-apoE4 monoclonal antibody as reporter. Our results indicate that the apoE-polystyrene binding interaction is highly stable, resistant to detergents and acid and basic washes. The methodology here described is accurate, easily implementable, fast and cost-effective. Although at present, our technique is unable to discriminate homozygous APOE ε4/ε4 from APOE ε3/ε4 and ε2/ε4 heterozygous, it opens new avenues for the development of inexpensive, yet effective, tests for the detection of apoE4 for patients' stratification. Preliminary results indicated that this methodology is also adaptable into turbidimetric platforms, which make it a good candidate for clinical implementation through its translation to the clinical analysis routine. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 19 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 8 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 25 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 05 October 2018.
All research outputs
#2,274,886
of 23,592,647 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#20,087
of 127,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,640
of 328,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#564
of 3,345 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,592,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 127,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 328,976 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,345 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.