↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

A review and update on orphan drugs for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
A review and update on orphan drugs for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, January 2017
DOI 10.2147/opth.s121734
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caiyun You, Haitham F Sahawneh, Lina Ma, Buraa Kubaisi, Alexander Schmidt, C Stephen Foster

Abstract

Uveitis, a leading cause of preventable blindness around the world, is a critically underserved disease in regard to the medications approved for use. Multiple immunomodulatory therapy (IMT) drugs are appropriate for uveitis therapy but are still off-label. These IMT agents, including antimetabolites, calcineurin inhibitors, alkylating agents, and biologic agents, have been designated as "orphan drugs" and are widely used for systemic autoimmune diseases or organ transplantation. The purpose of this paper is to comprehensively review and summarize the approved orphan drugs and biologics that are being used to treat systemic diseases and to discuss drugs that have not yet received approval as an "orphan drug for treating uveitis" by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). IMT, as a steroid-sparing agent for uveitis patients, has shown promising clinical results. Refractory and recurrent uveitis requires combination IMT agents. IMT is continued for a period of 2 years while the patient is in remission before considering tapering medication. Our current goals include developing further assessments regarding the efficacy, optimal dose, and safety in efforts to achieve FDA approval for "on-label" use of current IMT agents and biologics more quickly and to facilitate insurance coverage and expand access to the products for this orphan disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Student > Master 7 18%
Researcher 4 10%
Other 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 51%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 8 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 16 May 2017.
All research outputs
#5,242,603
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#465
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,712
of 421,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#9
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 421,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.