↓ Skip to main content

Rapid in vivo detection of isoniazid-sensitive Mycobacterium tuberculosis by breath test

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Rapid in vivo detection of isoniazid-sensitive Mycobacterium tuberculosis by breath test
Published in
Nature Communications, September 2014
DOI 10.1038/ncomms5989
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seong W. Choi, Mamoudou Maiga, Mariama C. Maiga, Viorel Atudorei, Zachary D. Sharp, William R. Bishai, Graham S. Timmins

Abstract

There is urgent need for rapid, point-of-care diagnostic tools for tuberculosis (TB) and drug sensitivity. Current methods based on in vitro growth take weeks, while DNA amplification can neither differentiate live from dead organisms nor determine phenotypic drug resistance. Here we show the development and evaluation of a rapid breath test for isoniazid (INH)-sensitive TB based on detection of labelled N2 gas formed specifically from labelled INH by mycobacterial KatG enzyme. In vitro data show that the assay is specific, dependent on mycobacterial abundance and discriminates between INH-sensitive and INH-resistant (S315T mutant KatG) TB. In vivo, the assay is rapid with maximal detection of (15)N2 in exhaled breath of infected rabbits within 5-10 min. No increase in (15)N2 is detected in uninfected animals, and the increases in (15)N2 are dependent on infection dose. This test may allow rapid detection of INH-sensitive TB.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
France 1 3%
Unknown 34 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 17%
Student > Master 6 17%
Professor 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Chemistry 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 7 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. 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 23 December 2014.
All research outputs
#316,011
of 17,833,983 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#5,706
of 35,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,068
of 217,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#65
of 604 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,833,983 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,267 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 52.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 217,997 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 604 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.