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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Immune Repertoire Profiling Reveals that Clonally Expanded B and T Cells Infiltrating Diseased Human Kidneys Can Also Be Tracked in Blood
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0143125 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Johannes Weinberger, Raul Jimenez-Heredia, Susanne Schaller, Susanne Suessner, Judith Sunzenauer, Roman Reindl-Schwaighofer, Richard Weiss, Stephan Winkler, Christian Gabriel, Martin Danzer, Rainer Oberbauer |
| Abstract |
Recent advances in high-throughput sequencing allow for the competitive analysis of the human B and T cell immune repertoire. In this study we compared Immunoglobulin and T cell receptor repertoires of lymphocytes found in kidney and blood samples of 10 patients with various renal diseases based on next-generation sequencing data. We used Biomed-2 primer panels and ImmunExplorer software to sequence, analyze and compare complementarity determining regions and V-(D)-J elements. While generally an individual's renal receptor repertoire is different from the repertoire present in blood, 94% (30/32) of the lymphocytes with clonal expansion in kidney can also be traced in blood however, not all of these clonotypes are equally abundant. Summarizing the data of all analyzed patients, 68% of highly expanded T cell clonotypes and 30% of the highly expanded B cell clonotypes that have infiltrated the kidney can be found amongst the five most abundant clonotypes in blood. In addition, complementarity determining region 3 sequences of the immunoglobulin heavy chains are on average more diverse than T cell receptor beta chains. Immune repertoire analysis of tissue infiltrating B and T cells adds new approaches to the assessment of adaptive immune response in kidney diseases. Our data suggest that expanded clonotypes in the tissues might be traceable in blood samples in the course of treatment or the natural history of the disease. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 19% |
| Unknown | 2 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 10% |
| Engineering | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,778,101
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#147,475
of 194,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,188
of 386,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,533
of 5,005 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,871 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 386,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,005 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.