↓ Skip to main content

VISPA: a computational pipeline for the identification and analysis of genomic vector integration sites

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
VISPA: a computational pipeline for the identification and analysis of genomic vector integration sites
Published in
Genome Medicine, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13073-014-0067-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Calabria, Simone Leo, Fabrizio Benedicenti, Daniela Cesana, Giulio Spinozzi, Massimilano Orsini, Stefania Merella, Elia Stupka, Gianluigi Zanetti, Eugenio Montini

Abstract

The analysis of the genomic distribution of viral vector genomic integration sites is a key step in hematopoietic stem cell-based gene therapy applications, allowing to assess both the safety and the efficacy of the treatment and to study the basic aspects of hematopoiesis and stem cell biology. Identifying vector integration sites requires ad-hoc bioinformatics tools with stringent requirements in terms of computational efficiency, flexibility, and usability. We developed VISPA (Vector Integration Site Parallel Analysis), a pipeline for automated integration site identification and annotation based on a distributed environment with a simple Galaxy web interface. VISPA was successfully used for the bioinformatics analysis of the follow-up of two lentiviral vector-based hematopoietic stem-cell gene therapy clinical trials. Our pipeline provides a reliable and efficient tool to assess the safety and efficacy of integrating vectors in clinical settings.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 3%
Germany 1 2%
France 1 2%
Finland 1 2%
Argentina 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 58 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 20%
Computer Science 6 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 7 11%
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 25 October 2014.
All research outputs
#18,382,900
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#1,368
of 1,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,450
of 237,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#38
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.7. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 237,864 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.