↓ Skip to main content

Reanalysis of RNA-Sequencing Data Reveals Several Additional Fusion Genes with Multiple Isoforms

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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.
Title
Reanalysis of RNA-Sequencing Data Reveals Several Additional Fusion Genes with Multiple Isoforms
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0048745
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara Kangaspeska, Susanne Hultsch, Henrik Edgren, Daniel Nicorici, Astrid Murumägi, Olli Kallioniemi

Abstract

RNA-sequencing and tailored bioinformatic methodologies have paved the way for identification of expressed fusion genes from the chaotic genomes of solid tumors. We have recently successfully exploited RNA-sequencing for the discovery of 24 novel fusion genes in breast cancer. Here, we demonstrate the importance of continuous optimization of the bioinformatic methodology for this purpose, and report the discovery and experimental validation of 13 additional fusion genes from the same samples. Integration of copy number profiling with the RNA-sequencing results revealed that the majority of the gene fusions were promoter-donating events that occurred at copy number transition points or involved high-level DNA-amplifications. Sequencing of genomic fusion break points confirmed that DNA-level rearrangements underlie selected fusion transcripts. Furthermore, a significant portion (>60%) of the fusion genes were alternatively spliced. This illustrates the importance of reanalyzing sequencing data as gene definitions change and bioinformatic methods improve, and highlights the previously unforeseen isoform diversity among fusion transcripts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
France 1 1%
Norway 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Singapore 1 1%
Unknown 69 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 29%
Researcher 17 23%
Student > Master 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 5%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 5 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 23%
Computer Science 7 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 9%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 6 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 16 October 2013.
All research outputs
#2,626,048
of 22,684,168 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#33,334
of 193,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,391
of 184,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#655
of 4,894 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,684,168 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,651 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 184,188 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,894 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.