↓ Skip to main content

Molecular Mechanisms of Injury in HIV-Associated Nephropathy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 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
Molecular Mechanisms of Injury in HIV-Associated Nephropathy
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2018.00177
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel J. Rednor, Michael J. Ross

Abstract

HIV-associated nephropathy (HIVAN) is an important cause of secondary focal glomerulosclerosis that occurs primarily in persons of African ancestry with advanced HIV disease. Although HIVAN is characterized by severe proteinuria and rapid progression to end stage renal disease without treatment, the phenotype is markedly attenuated by treatment with antiretroviral medications. HIV infection of glomerular and tubular epithelial cells and subsequent viral gene expression is a key contributor to HIVAN pathogenesis and the kidney can serve as reservoir for HIV strains that differ those in blood. HIV gene expression in renal epithelial cells leads to dysregulation of cellular pathways including cell cycle, inflammation, cell death, and cytoskeletal homeostasis. Polymorphisms in the APOL1 gene explain the marked predilection of HIVAN to occur in persons of African descent and HIVAN. Since HIVAN has the strongest association with APOL1 genotype of any of the APOL1-associated nephropathies, studies to determine the mechanisms by which HIV and APOL1 risk variants together promote kidney injury hold great promise to improve our understanding of the pathogenesis of APOL1-mediated kidney diseases.

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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 20%
Other 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Researcher 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 17 35%
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 07 June 2018.
All research outputs
#17,978,863
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#3,727
of 5,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,157
of 329,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#67
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 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 5,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 329,367 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.