| Title |
Characterization of human cytomegalovirus genome diversity in immunocompromised hosts by whole genomic sequencing directly from clinical specimens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Infectious Diseases, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1093/infdis/jix157 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elias Hage, Gavin S Wilkie, Silvia Linnenweber-Held, Akshay Dhingra, Nicolás M Suárez, Julius J Schmidt, Penelope C Kay-Fedorov, Eva Mischak-Weissinger, Albert Heim, Anke Schwarz, Thomas F Schulz, Andrew J Davison, Tina Ganzenmueller |
| Abstract |
Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies allow comprehensive studies of genetic diversity over the entire genome of human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), a significant pathogen for immunocompromised individuals. NGS was performed on target-enriched sequence libraries prepared directly from a variety of clinical specimens (blood, urine, breast-milk, respiratory samples, biopsies and vitreous humor) obtained longitudinally or from different anatomical compartments from 20 HCMV-infected patients (renal transplant recipients, stem cell transplant recipients and congenitally infected children). De novo assembled HCMV genome sequences were obtained for 57/68 sequenced samples. Analysis of longitudinal or compartmental HCMV diversity revealed various patterns: no major differences were detected among longitudinal, intra-individual blood samples from 9/15 patients and in most of the patients with compartmental samples, whereas a switch of the major HCMV population was observed in six individuals with sequential blood samples and upon compartmental analysis of one patient with HCMV retinitis. Variant analysis revealed additional aspects of minor virus population dynamics and antiviral resistance mutations. In immunosuppressed patients, HCMV can remain relatively stable or undergo drastic genomic changes that are suggestive of the emergence of minor resident strains or de novo infection. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 84 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Researcher | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 24 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 8 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 25 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,623,507
of 25,411,814 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Infectious Diseases
#11,525
of 14,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,650
of 323,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Infectious Diseases
#67
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,411,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 323,105 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.