↓ Skip to main content

Fibrinogen alpha C chain 5.9 kDa fragment (FIC5.9), a biomarker for various pathological conditions, is produced in post-blood collection by fibrinolysis and coagulation factors

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Proteomics, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
Fibrinogen alpha C chain 5.9 kDa fragment (FIC5.9), a biomarker for various pathological conditions, is produced in post-blood collection by fibrinolysis and coagulation factors
Published in
Clinical Proteomics, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12014-016-9129-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wataru Kikuchi, Motoi Nishimura, Takahisa Kuga, Sachio Tsuchida, Tatsuya Saito, Mamoru Satoh, Kenta Noda, Yoshio Kodera, Takeshi Tomonaga, Fumio Nomura

Abstract

Fibrinogen alpha C chain 5.9 kDa fragment (FIC5.9) is a new serum biomarker for chronic hepatitis that was discovered by proteomics analysis. Previous studies have shown that FIC5.9 is derived from the C-terminal region of fibrinogen alpha chain and the serum levels of FIC5.9 decrease in chronic hepatitis. It also have been reported that FIC5.9 cannot be detected in the blood stream of the systemic circulation and it is released from fibrinogen during blood clotting in collecting tube. However, the mechanism of FIC5.9 releasing from fibrinogen is unclear. We formulated a hypothesis that FIC5.9 is released by enzymes that are activated by post-blood collection and may be coagulation and fibrinolysis factors. In this study, we analyzed the mechanisms of FIC5.9 releasing from fibrinogen in healthy blood. Our analysis showed that thrombin acts as an initiator for FIC5.9 releasing, and that mainly plasmin cleaves N-terminal end of FIC5.9 and neutrophil elastase cleave C-terminal end of FIC5.9. FIC5.9 reflects minute changes in coagulation and fibrinolysis factors and may be associated with pathological conditions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 40%
Student > Bachelor 1 20%
Student > Master 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 20%
Computer Science 1 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%

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 October 2016.
All research outputs
#9,586,658
of 12,480,234 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Proteomics
#109
of 156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,605
of 266,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Proteomics
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,480,234 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 156 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 266,479 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.