| Title |
Use of the kidney injury molecule-1 as a biomarker for early detection of renal tubular dysfunction in a population chronically exposed to cadmium in the environment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-2-533 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Werawan Ruangyuttikarn, Amnart Panyamoon, Kowit Nambunmee, Ryumon Honda, Witaya Swaddiwudhipong, Muneko Nishijo |
| Abstract |
Cadmium (Cd) has been found as an environmental pollutant in Mae Sot district, Tak province, Thailand. Prolong exposure to high levels of Cd of the resident increases high risk of Cd toxicity especially to kidney which is the primary target of Cd. In order to investigate the early effect of Cd induced renal dysfunction, a kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), a novel biomarker of renal tubular dysfunction, was measured using an enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The method was validated and used to quantify the KIM-1 concentrations in the urine of 700 subjects (260 men, 440 women) who lived in the Cd contaminated area. The KIM-1 concentrations were compared to the concentrations of two conventional renal tubular dysfunction biomarkers, N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase (NAG) and β2-microglobulin (β2-MG). Urinary KIM-1 was correlated with urinary and blood Cd as well as NAG. After adjustment of age and smoking, urinary KIM-1 was correlated with blood Cd more than urinary NAG did. Clear dose response relationships of urinary KIM-1 with urinary Cd were shown in both men and women. These results indicate that the urinary KIM-1 might be more sensitive biomarker than urinary NAG and β2-MG for an early detection of renal tubular dysfunction. It is useful as a tool to detect renal effect of toxicity due to chronic Cd exposure at high level. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Sri Lanka | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 7 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 9% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 23% |
| Unknown | 7 | 20% |
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 22 October 2013.
All research outputs
#15,283,138
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#932
of 1,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,903
of 211,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#52
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 211,883 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.