↓ Skip to main content

Cardiac Non-Human Leukocyte Antigen Identification: Techniques and Troubles

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Cardiac Non-Human Leukocyte Antigen Identification: Techniques and Troubles
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01332
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine V. Gates, Naveen L. Pereira, Leigh G. Griffiths

Abstract

Historically efforts have focused on the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) as the major cause for acute and chronic rejection following cardiac transplantation. However, rising evidence indicates that non-HLA antibodies can be both primary initiators and modifiers of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) and cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV). The purpose of this review is to assess currently available technologies for non-HLA identification and leveraging such responses toward antibody quantification. Several techniques have been used to identify antigenic determinants of recipient graft-specific non-HLA humoral immune responses, but each comes with its own set of benefits and caveats. Improving our ability to detect non-HLA humoral immune response will aid in our understanding of the underlying antigenic determinants of AMR and CAV, as well as improve patient outcomes.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Master 3 20%
Student > Bachelor 3 20%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 7%
Librarian 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 53%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Decision Sciences 1 7%
Physics and Astronomy 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 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 24 November 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#27,431
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,726
of 336,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#510
of 565 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 336,554 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 565 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.