↓ Skip to main content

What can the CF registry tell us about rare CFTR-mutations? A Belgian study

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
What can the CF registry tell us about rare CFTR-mutations? A Belgian study
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13023-017-0694-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. De Wachter, M. Thomas, S. S. Wanyama, S. Seneca, A. Malfroot

Abstract

CFTR2 provides clinical and functional information of the most common CFTR-mutations. Rare mutations (RMs) occur in only a few patients with limited reported clinical data. Their role in CF-disease liability is hardly documented. Belgian CF-Registry 2013 data were analyzed to identify CF with at least 1 RM (CF+RM). Clinical data and sweat chloride of CF+RM were compared to CF-controls, carrying 2 class 1 to 3 mutations (CFclassic). Disease severity was compared between both groups. To avoid bias in the comparison, transplanted patients were excluded from each group. Seventy-seven CF+RM were identified (77/1183 = 6.5%). Sixty-four different RM were detected, of which 21 had not been previously reported. All RMs, corresponding to HGVS (Human Genome Variation Society) nomenclature, were listed in supplementary data. Seven transplanted CF+RM were excluded for further analysis. CF+RM had higher age at diagnosis [median (IQR)] [3.7 y (0.3-18.3) vs. 0.3y (0.1-2,0) (p < 0.0001)], lower sweat chloride [96 mmol/L (64-107) vs. 104 mmol/L (97-115) (p < 0.0001)], higher FEV1%pred [77%pred (58-96) vs. 68%pred (48-86) (p = 0.017)], were less frequently pancreatic insufficient [56% vs. 98% (p < 0.0001)], Pseudomonas aeruginosa colonized [24% vs. 44% (p = 0.0093)] and needed fewer IV antibiotics [36% vs. 51% (p = 0.041)] than CFclassic. However, a wide spectrum of disease severity was seen amongst CF+RM. CF-patients with a RM cover 6.5% of the Belgian CF-population. Rare mutations can be found in severely ill patients, but more often in late diagnosed, pancreatic sufficient patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 17%
Other 5 14%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 14 39%
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 29 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,477,045
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,818
of 2,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,141
of 317,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#26
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 317,366 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.