Oxford Classification of IgA nephropathy 2016: an update from the IgA Nephropathy Classification Working Group
Kidney International, ISSN: 0085-2538, Vol: 91, Issue: 5, Page: 1014-1021
2017
- 871Citations
- 365Captures
- 26Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations871
- Citation Indexes870
- 870
- CrossRef294
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Captures365
- Readers365
- 365
- Mentions26
- News Mentions26
- News26
Most Recent News
Molecular Differences in Glomerular Compartment to Distinguish Immunoglobulin A Nephropathy and Lupus Nephritis
1Department of Nephrology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, 100191, People’s Republic of China; 2School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, People’s Republic of China Background:
Article Description
Since the Oxford Classification of IgA nephropathy (IgAN) was published in 2009, MEST scores have been increasingly used in clinical practice. Further retrospective cohort studies have confirmed that in biopsy specimens with a minimum of 8 glomeruli, mesangial hypercellularity (M), segmental sclerosis (S), and interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy (T) lesions predict clinical outcome. In a larger, more broadly based cohort than in the original Oxford study, crescents (C) are predictive of outcome, and we now recommend that C be added to the MEST score, and biopsy reporting should provide a MEST-C score. Inconsistencies in the reporting of M and endocapillary cellularity (E) lesions have been reported, so a web-based educational tool to assist pathologists has been developed. A large study showed E lesions are predictive of outcome in children and adults, but only in those without immunosuppression. A review of S lesions suggests there may be clinical utility in the subclassification of segmental sclerosis, identifying those cases with evidence of podocyte damage. It has now been shown that combining the MEST score with clinical data at biopsy provides the same predictive power as monitoring clinical data for 2 years; this requires further evaluation to assess earlier effective treatment intervention. The IgAN Classification Working Group has established a well-characterized dataset from a large cohort of adults and children with IgAN that will provide a substrate for further studies to refine risk prediction and clinical utility, including the MEST-C score and other factors.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0085253817301011; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.kint.2017.02.003; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85015786890&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28341274; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0085253817301011; https://facultyopinions.com/prime/727446878#eval793530122; http://dx.doi.org/10.3410/f.727446878.793530122; https://facultyopinions.com/prime/727446878#eval793533679; http://dx.doi.org/10.3410/f.727446878.793533679; http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0085253817301011; https://www.kidney-international.org/article/S0085-2538(17)30101-1/fulltext; http://www.kidney-international.org/article/S0085253817301011/abstract; http://www.kidney-international.org/article/S0085253817301011/fulltext; http://www.kidney-international.org/article/S0085253817301011/pdf; https://www.kidney-international.org/article/S0085-2538(17)30101-1/abstract
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know