↓ Skip to main content

B cell repertoires in HLA-sensitized kidney transplant candidates undergoing desensitization therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
B cell repertoires in HLA-sensitized kidney transplant candidates undergoing desensitization therapy
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12967-017-1118-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

John F. Beausang, H. Christina Fan, Rene Sit, Maria U. Hutchins, Kshama Jirage, Rachael Curtis, Edward Hutchins, Stephen R. Quake, Julie M. Yabu

Abstract

Kidney transplantation is the most effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. Sensitization refers to pre-existing antibodies against human leukocyte antigen (HLA) protein and remains a major barrier to successful transplantation. Despite implementation of desensitization strategies, many candidates fail to respond. Our objective was to determine whether measuring B cell repertoires could differentiate candidates that respond to desensitization therapy. We developed an assay based on high-throughput DNA sequencing of the variable domain of the heavy chain of immunoglobulin genes to measure changes in B cell repertoires in 19 highly HLA-sensitized kidney transplant candidates undergoing desensitization and 7 controls with low to moderate HLA sensitization levels. Responders to desensitization had a decrease of 5% points or greater in cumulated calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) levels, and non-responders had no decrease in cPRA. Dominant B cell clones were not observed in highly sensitized candidates, suggesting that the B cells responsible for sensitization are either not present in peripheral blood or present at comparable levels to other circulating B cells. Candidates that responded to desensitization therapy had pre-treatment repertoires composed of a larger fraction of class-switched (IgG and IgA) isotypes compared to non-responding candidates. After B cell depleting therapy, the proportion of switched isotypes increased and the mutation frequencies of the remaining non-switched isotypes (IgM and IgD) increased in both responders and non-responders, perhaps representing a shift in the repertoire towards memory B cells or plasmablasts. Conversely, after transplantation, non-switched isotypes with fewer mutations increased, suggesting a shift in the repertoire towards naïve B cells. Relative abundance of different B cell isotypes is strongly perturbed by desensitization therapy and transplantation, potentially reflecting changes in the relative abundance of memory and naïve B cell compartments. Candidates that responded to therapy experienced similar changes to those that did not respond. Further studies are required to understand differences between these two groups of highly sensitized kidney transplant candidates.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 24%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 9 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Engineering 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 10 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,318,931
of 22,940,083 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,791
of 4,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,292
of 421,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#30
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,940,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 421,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 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 51% of its contemporaries.