↓ Skip to main content

Genome-wide association study identifies multiple risk loci for renal cell carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
34 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Genome-wide association study identifies multiple risk loci for renal cell carcinoma
Published in
Nature Communications, June 2017
DOI 10.1038/ncomms15724
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ghislaine Scelo, Mark P. Purdue, Kevin M. Brown, Mattias Johansson, Zhaoming Wang, Jeanette E. Eckel-Passow, Yuanqing Ye, Jonathan N. Hofmann, Jiyeon Choi, Matthieu Foll, Valerie Gaborieau, Mitchell J. Machiela, Leandro M. Colli, Peng Li, Joshua N. Sampson, Behnoush Abedi-Ardekani, Celine Besse, Helene Blanche, Anne Boland, Laurie Burdette, Amelie Chabrier, Geoffroy Durand, Florence Le Calvez-Kelm, Egor Prokhortchouk, Nivonirina Robinot, Konstantin G. Skryabin, Magdalena B. Wozniak, Meredith Yeager, Gordana Basta-Jovanovic, Zoran Dzamic, Lenka Foretova, Ivana Holcatova, Vladimir Janout, Dana Mates, Anush Mukeriya, Stefan Rascu, David Zaridze, Vladimir Bencko, Cezary Cybulski, Eleonora Fabianova, Viorel Jinga, Jolanta Lissowska, Jan Lubinski, Marie Navratilova, Peter Rudnai, Neonila Szeszenia-Dabrowska, Simone Benhamou, Geraldine Cancel-Tassin, Olivier Cussenot, Laura Baglietto, Heiner Boeing, Kay-Tee Khaw, Elisabete Weiderpass, Borje Ljungberg, Raviprakash T. Sitaram, Fiona Bruinsma, Susan J. Jordan, Gianluca Severi, Ingrid Winship, Kristian Hveem, Lars J. Vatten, Tony Fletcher, Kvetoslava Koppova, Susanna C. Larsson, Alicja Wolk, Rosamonde E. Banks, Peter J. Selby, Douglas F. Easton, Paul Pharoah, Gabriella Andreotti, Laura E. Beane Freeman, Stella Koutros, Demetrius Albanes, Satu Männistö, Stephanie Weinstein, Peter E. Clark, Todd L. Edwards, Loren Lipworth, Susan M. Gapstur, Victoria L. Stevens, Hallie Carol, Matthew L. Freedman, Mark M. Pomerantz, Eunyoung Cho, Peter Kraft, Mark A. Preston, Kathryn M. Wilson, J. Michael Gaziano, Howard D. Sesso, Amanda Black, Neal D. Freedman, Wen-Yi Huang, John G. Anema, Richard J. Kahnoski, Brian R. Lane, Sabrina L. Noyes, David Petillo, Bin Tean Teh, Ulrike Peters, Emily White, Garnet L. Anderson, Lisa Johnson, Juhua Luo, Julie Buring, I-Min Lee, Wong-Ho Chow, Lee E. Moore, Christopher Wood, Timothy Eisen, Marc Henrion, James Larkin, Poulami Barman, Bradley C. Leibovich, Toni K. Choueiri, G. Mark Lathrop, Nathaniel Rothman, Jean-Francois Deleuze, James D. McKay, Alexander S. Parker, Xifeng Wu, Richard S. Houlston, Paul Brennan, Stephen J. Chanock

Abstract

Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified six risk loci for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We conducted a meta-analysis of two new scans of 5,198 cases and 7,331 controls together with four existing scans, totalling 10,784 cases and 20,406 controls of European ancestry. Twenty-four loci were tested in an additional 3,182 cases and 6,301 controls. We confirm the six known RCC risk loci and identify seven new loci at 1p32.3 (rs4381241, P=3.1 × 10(-10)), 3p22.1 (rs67311347, P=2.5 × 10(-8)), 3q26.2 (rs10936602, P=8.8 × 10(-9)), 8p21.3 (rs2241261, P=5.8 × 10(-9)), 10q24.33-q25.1 (rs11813268, P=3.9 × 10(-8)), 11q22.3 (rs74911261, P=2.1 × 10(-10)) and 14q24.2 (rs4903064, P=2.2 × 10(-24)). Expression quantitative trait analyses suggest plausible candidate genes at these regions that may contribute to RCC susceptibility.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 22%
Researcher 12 22%
Unspecified 7 13%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 5 9%
Other 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 19%
Unspecified 9 17%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 5 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 26 December 2017.
All research outputs
#571,355
of 13,330,958 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#8,283
of 23,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,765
of 267,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#16
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,330,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,601 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 47.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 267,876 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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 67% of its contemporaries.