↓ Skip to main content

B-cell repertoire dynamics after sequential hepatitis B vaccination and evidence for cross-reactive B-cell activation

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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 repertoire dynamics after sequential hepatitis B vaccination and evidence for cross-reactive B-cell activation
Published in
Genome Medicine, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13073-016-0322-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacob D. Galson, Johannes Trück, Elizabeth A. Clutterbuck, Anna Fowler, Vincenzo Cerundolo, Andrew J. Pollard, Gerton Lunter, Dominic F. Kelly

Abstract

A diverse B-cell repertoire is essential for recognition and response to infectious and vaccine antigens. High-throughput sequencing of B-cell receptor (BCR) genes can now be used to study the B-cell repertoire at great depth and may shed more light on B-cell responses than conventional immunological methods. Here, we use high-throughput BCR sequencing to provide novel insight into B-cell dynamics following a primary course of hepatitis B vaccination. Nine vaccine-naïve participants were administered three doses of hepatitis B vaccine (months 0, 1, and 2 or 7). High-throughput Illumina sequencing of the total BCR repertoire was combined with targeted sequencing of sorted vaccine antigen-enriched B cells to analyze the longitudinal response of both the total and vaccine-specific repertoire after each vaccine. ELISpot was used to determine vaccine-specific cell numbers following each vaccine. Deconvoluting the vaccine-specific from total BCR repertoire showed that vaccine-specific sequence clusters comprised <0.1 % of total sequence clusters, and had certain stereotypic features. The vaccine-specific BCR sequence clusters were expanded after each of the three vaccine doses, despite no vaccine-specific B cells being detected by ELISpot after the first vaccine dose. These vaccine-specific BCR clusters detected after the first vaccine dose had distinct properties compared to those detected after subsequent doses; they were more mutated, present at low frequency even prior to vaccination, and appeared to be derived from more mature B cells. These results demonstrate the high-sensitivity of our vaccine-specific BCR analysis approach and suggest an alternative view of the B-cell response to novel antigens. In the response to the first vaccine dose, many vaccine-specific BCR clusters appeared to largely derive from previously activated cross-reactive B cells that have low affinity for the vaccine antigen, and subsequent doses were required to yield higher affinity B cells.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Unknown 106 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 19%
Student > Master 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 19 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Computer Science 5 5%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 27 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 27 August 2016.
All research outputs
#5,879,037
of 24,288,533 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#990
of 1,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,780
of 332,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#17
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,288,533 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,500 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 332,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 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.