↓ Skip to main content

Profound impact of sample processing delay on gene expression of multiple myeloma plasma cells

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Genomics, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Profound impact of sample processing delay on gene expression of multiple myeloma plasma cells
Published in
BMC Medical Genomics, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12920-015-0161-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tobias Meißner, Anja Seckinger, Kari Hemminki, Uta Bertsch, Asta Foersti, Mathias Haenel, Jan Duering, Hans Salwender, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Gareth J. Morgan, Dirk Hose, Niels Weinhold

Abstract

Gene expression profiling (GEP) has significantly contributed to the elucidation of the molecular heterogeneity of multiple myeloma plasma cells (MMPC) and only recently it has been recommended for risk stratification. Prior to GEP MMPC need to be enriched resulting in an inability to immediately freeze bone marrow aspirates or use RNA stabilization reagents. As a result in multi-center MM trials sample processing delay due to shipping may be an important confounder of molecular analyses and risk stratification based on GEP data. We compared GEP data of 145 in-house and 246 shipped samples and detected 3301 down-regulated and 3501 up-regulated genes in shipped samples. For 3994 genes we confirmed differential expression in an independent set of 85 in-house and 97 shipped samples. Differentially expressed genes were enriched in processes like ribosome biogenesis, cell cycle, and apoptosis. Among GEP based risk predictors the IFM-15 seemed to underestimate high risk in shipped samples, whereas the GEP70 and the EMC-92 gene signatures were more robust. In order to provide a tool to assess the "shipping effect" in public repositories, we generated a 17-gene predictor for shipped samples with a 10-fold cross validation error rate of 0.06 for the training set and an error rate of 0.15 for the validation set. Sample processing delay significantly influences GEP of MMPC, implying it should be avoided if samples were used for risk stratification.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Denmark 1 4%
Germany 1 4%
Unknown 25 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 39%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Sports and Recreations 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 5 18%
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 07 January 2016.
All research outputs
#13,961,191
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Genomics
#536
of 1,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,329
of 393,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Genomics
#18
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,223 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 393,178 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.