| Title |
Obinutuzumab in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: design, development and place in therapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s104869 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Othman Al-Sawaf, Kirsten Fischer, Anja Engelke, Natali Pflug, Michael Hallek, Valentin Goede |
| Abstract |
For decades, treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has been based on chemotherapy. This changed when the first CD20 antibody rituximab was introduced. Since 2008, the combination of chemotherapy and CD20 antibodies has become the standard of care for most patients, and a significant fraction of patients had very long-lasting remissions after chemoimmunotherapy. Despite the improvement of response rates and overall survival (OS) by the use of chemoimmunotherapy, most CLL patients will relapse eventually. One approach to achieve more durable responses was the development of obinutuzumab (GA101), a new type of CD20 antibody that has unique molecular and functional characteristics. Obinutuzumab is a type II fully humanized CD20 antibody that binds to a partly different epitope of the CD20 protein than rituximab and due to its glycoengineered design induces greater antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC). Initial preclinical observations of a more effective B-cell depletion have been successfully reproduced in clinical trials with CLL patients. This review summarizes results of preclinical as well as clinical studies with obinutuzumab and provides an outlook on its future role in the therapy of CLL. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 23% |
| Researcher | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Librarian | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 16 | 33% |
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 30 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,112,415
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,299
of 2,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#305,813
of 422,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 422,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.