↓ Skip to main content

Cavitating leukoencephalopathy with multiple mitochondrial dysfunction syndrome and NFU1 mutations

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Cavitating leukoencephalopathy with multiple mitochondrial dysfunction syndrome and NFU1 mutations
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00412
Pubmed ID
Authors

Federica Invernizzi, Anna Ardissone, Eleonora Lamantea, Barbara Garavaglia, Massimo Zeviani, Laura Farina, Daniele Ghezzi, Isabella Moroni

Abstract

Multiple Mitochondrial Dysfunction Syndrome (MMDS) comprises a group of severe autosomal recessive diseases with onset in early infancy and characterized by a systemic disorder of energy metabolism, resulting in weakness, respiratory failure, lack of neurological development, lactic acidosis, and early death. Biochemical findings include defects of complexes I, II, and III of the mitochondrial respiratory chain and severe deficiency of Pyruvate dehydrogenase complex (PDHc). Three genes have been associated with MMDS since now: NFU1, BOLA3, and IBA57. We describe an Italian male patient presenting with severe psychomotor regression after an infectious episode, lactic acidosis, hyperglycinemia, reduction of respiratory chain complex II associated with a marked deficiency of PDHc activity. He carried two heterozygous mutations in NFU1, one novel (p.Cys210Phe) and one previously reported (p.Gly189Arg) missense change affecting highly conserved residues. A severe leukoencephalopathy with cavitations in deep white matter was disclosed at brain MRI, suggesting a peculiar neuroradiological phenotype associated with defect in this gene.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 3%
Unknown 39 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Other 5 13%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Chemistry 3 8%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 8 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 December 2014.
All research outputs
#18,384,336
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#7,018
of 11,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,848
of 362,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#82
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,758 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 362,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.