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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Impact of naturally occurring amino acid variations on the detection of HIV-1 p24 in diagnostic antigen tests
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12879-015-1174-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Beatrice N. Vetter, Vanessa Orlowski, Christoph Niederhauser, Louise Walter, Jörg Schüpbach |
| Abstract |
The detection of HIV-1 p24 antigen in diagnostic tests relies on antibodies binding to conserved areas of the protein to cover the full range of HIV-1 subtypes. Using a panel of 43 different virus-like particles (VLPs) expressing Gag from clinical HIV-1 isolates, we previously found that some highly sensitive tests completely failed to detect p24 of certain VLPs, seemingly unrelated to their subtype. Here we aimed to investigate the reason for this failure, hypothesising that it might be due to single amino acid variations in conserved epitopes. Using amino acid alignment, we identified single amino acid variations at position 16 or 170 of p24, unique to those VLPs that failed to be detected in certain diagnostic tests. Through DNA-mutagenesis, these amino acids were changed to ones more commonly found at these positions. The impact of these changes on p24 detection was tested in commercial diagnostic tests as well as by Western Blot and ELISA, using epitope-specific antibodies. Changing positions 16 or 170 to consensus amino acids restored the detection of p24 by the investigated diagnostic tests as well as by epitope-specific antibodies in Western Blot and ELISA. Hence, single amino acid changes in conserved epitopes can lead to the failure of p24 detection and thus to false-negative results. To optimise HIV diagnostic tests, they should also be evaluated using isolates which harbour less-frequent epitope variants. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 13% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#18,429,829
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,602
of 7,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,931
of 284,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#132
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 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 7,678 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 284,657 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 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.