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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Impact of Preformed Donor-Specific Anti-Human Leukocyte Antigen Antibody C1q-Binding Ability on Kidney Allograft Outcome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01310 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Juan Molina, Ana Navas, María-Luisa Agüera, Cristian Rodelo-Haad, Corona Alonso, Alberto Rodríguez-Benot, Pedro Aljama, Rafael Solana |
| Abstract |
The consolidation of single antigen beads (SAB-panIgG) assay in the detection of preformed anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies has improved transplantation success. However, its high sensitivity has limited the allograft allocation for sensitized patients, increasing their waiting time. A modification of the standard SAB-panIgG assay allows the detection of that subset of antibodies capable of binding C1q (SAB-C1q assay). However, the clinical usefulness of SAB-C1q assay for determining the unacceptable mismatches is under discussion. We retrospectively analyzed the impact of preformed donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA) according to the C1q-binding ability on allograft outcome, examining 389 single-kidney transplanted patients from deceased donors. Recipients with preformed C1q-binding DSA showed the lowest allograft survival up to 7 years (40.7%) compared to patients with preformed non-C1q-binding DSA (73.4%; p = 0.001) and without DSA (79.1%; p < 0.001). Allograft survival rate was similar between patients with preformed non-C1q-binding DSA and patients without preformed DSA (p = 0.403). Interestingly, among the high-mean fluorescence intensity DSA (≥10,000) population (n = 46), those patients whose DSA were further capable of binding C1q showed a poorer allograft outcome (38.4 vs. 68.9%; p = 0.041). Moreover, in our multivariate predictive model for assessing the risk of allograft loss, the presence of C1q-binding DSA (HR 4.012; CI 95% 2.326-6.919; p < 0.001) but not of non-C1q-binding DSA (HR 1.389; CI 95% 0.784-2.461; p = 0.260) remained an independent predictor after stratifying the DSA population according to the C1q-binding ability and adjusting the model for other pre-transplantation predictive factors including donor age, cold-ischemia time, and HLA-DR mismatches. In conclusion, the unacceptable mismatch definition according to the SAB-C1q assay would improve the risk stratification of allograft loss and increase the limited allograft allocation of highly sensitized patients, shortening their waiting time. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 32% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 March 2018.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#18,341
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,205
of 340,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#391
of 585 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 340,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 585 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.