↓ Skip to main content

Exploring the Clinical and Genetic Spectrum of Steroid Resistant Nephrotic Syndrome: The PodoNet Registry

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Exploring the Clinical and Genetic Spectrum of Steroid Resistant Nephrotic Syndrome: The PodoNet Registry
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fped.2018.00200
Pubmed ID
Authors

Agnes Trautmann, Beata S. Lipska-Ziętkiewicz, Franz Schaefer

Abstract

Background: Steroid resistant nephrotic syndrome (SRNS) is a rare condition, accounting for 10-15% of all children with idiopathic nephrotic syndrome. SRNS can be caused by genetic abnormalities or immune system dysfunction. The prognosis of SRNS varies from permanent remission to progression to end-stage kidney disease, and post-transplant recurrence is common. Objectives: The PodoNet registry project aims to explore the demographics and phenotypes of immune-mediated and genetic forms of childhood SRNS, to assess genotype-phenotype correlations, to evaluate clinical management and long-term outcomes, and to search for novel genetic entities and diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in SRNS. Methods: In 2009, an international registry for SRNS was established to collect retro- and prospective information on renal and extrarenal disease manifestations, histopathological and genetic findings and information on family history, pharmacotherapy responsiveness and long-term outcomes. To date, more than 2,000 patients have been enrolled at 72 pediatric nephrology centers, constituting the largest pediatric SRNS cohort assembled to date. Results: In the course of the project, traditional Sanger sequencing was replaced by NGS-based gene panel screening covering over 30 podocyte-related genes complemented by whole exome sequencing. These approaches allowed to establish genetic diagnoses in 24% of the patients screened, widened the spectrum of genetic disease entities presenting with SRNS phenotype (COL4A3-5, CLCN5), and contributed to the discovery of new disease causing genes (MYOE1, PTPRO). Forty two percent of patients responded to intensified immunosuppression with complete or partial remission of proteinuria, whereas 58% turned out multi-drug resistant. Medication responsiveness was highly predictive of a favorable long-term outcome, whereas the diagnosis of genetic disease was associated with a high risk to develop end-stage renal disease during childhood. Genetic SRNS forms were generally resistant to immunosuppressive treatment, justifying to avoid such pharmacotherapies altogether once a genetic diagnosis is established. Even symptomatic anti-proteinuric treatment with RAS antagonists seems to be challenging and of limited efficacy in genetic forms of SRNS. The risk of post-transplant disease recurrence was around 30% in non-genetic SRNS whereas it is negligible in genetic cases. Conclusion: In summary, the PodoNet Registry has collected detailed clinical and genetic information in a large SRNS cohort and continues to generate fundamental insights regarding demographic and etiological disease aspects, genotype-phenotype associations, the efficacy of therapeutic strategies, and long-term patient and renal outcomes including post-transplant disease recurrence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 5 6%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 27 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 34 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#6,837,454
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#1,164
of 6,141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,499
of 296,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#32
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
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 296,625 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.