↓ Skip to main content

Performance of gene-expression profiling test score variability to predict future clinical events in heart transplant recipients

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 1,689)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
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
Performance of gene-expression profiling test score variability to predict future clinical events in heart transplant recipients
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12872-015-0106-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria G. Crespo-Leiro, Jörg Stypmann, Uwe Schulz, Andreas Zuckermann, Paul Mohacsi, Christoph Bara, Heather Ross, Jayan Parameshwar, Michal Zakliczyński, Roberto Fiocchi, Daniel Hoefer, Mario Deng, Pascal Leprince, David Hiller, Lane Eubank, Emir Deljkich, James P. Yee, Johan Vanhaecke

Abstract

A single non-invasive gene expression profiling (GEP) test (AlloMap®) is often used to discriminate if a heart transplant recipient is at a low risk of acute cellular rejection at time of testing. In a randomized trial, use of the test (a GEP score from 0-40) has been shown to be non-inferior to a routine endomyocardial biopsy for surveillance after heart transplantation in selected low-risk patients with respect to clinical outcomes. Recently, it was suggested that the within-patient variability of consecutive GEP scores may be used to independently predict future clinical events; however, future studies were recommended. Here we performed an analysis of an independent patient population to determine the prognostic utility of within-patient variability of GEP scores in predicting future clinical events. We defined the GEP score variability as the standard deviation of four GEP scores collected ≥315 days post-transplantation. Of the 737 patients from the Cardiac Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observational (CARGO) II trial, 36 were assigned to the composite event group (death, re-transplantation or graft failure ≥315 days post-transplantation and within 3 years of the final GEP test) and 55 were assigned to the control group (non-event patients). In this case-controlled study, the performance of GEP score variability to predict future events was evaluated by the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC ROC). The negative predictive values (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV) including 95 % confidence intervals (CI) of GEP score variability were calculated. The estimated prevalence of events was 17 %. Events occurred at a median of 391 (inter-quartile range 376) days after the final GEP test. The GEP variability AUC ROC for the prediction of a composite event was 0.72 (95 % CI 0.6-0.8). The NPV for GEP score variability of 0.6 was 97 % (95 % CI 91.4-100.0); the PPV for GEP score variability of 1.5 was 35.4 % (95 % CI 13.5-75.8). In heart transplant recipients, a GEP score variability may be used to predict the probability that a composite event will occur within 3 years after the last GEP score. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00761787.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 46 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 18%
Other 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 December 2022.
All research outputs
#536,146
of 23,393,453 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#10
of 1,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,402
of 279,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#1
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,393,453 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 1,689 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 279,998 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 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.