| Title |
Many factor VIII products available in the treatment of hemophilia A: an embarrassment of riches?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Blood Medicine, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/jbm.s103796 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kenneth Lieuw |
| Abstract |
Hemophilia A (HA) is a common bleeding disorder caused by the deficiency of factor VIII (FVIII) with an incidence of ~1 in 5000 male births. Replacement of FVIII is necessary to prevent and treat bleeding episodes. However, with multiple new drugs in addition to old standards, choosing among the different FVIII treatment options is harder than ever. There are FVIII products that are plasma derived or recombinant, FVIII products designed to extend the half-life of FVIII, and the first single-chain FVIII product, recombinant factor VIII single chain (rFVIII-SC). As development of inhibitors to FVIII continues to be a major problem in the care of HA patients, recent studies showing lower rates of inhibitor development with plasma-derived FVIIII products versus recombinant FVIII products have made choosing among the many options now available even more complex. Although still unproven, extended half-life (EHL) products may provide the hope of decreased immunogenicity but need further testing in previously untreated patients (PUPs). This review highlights some of the differences between FVIII products currently available and hopefully assists the clinician to decide which FVIII product to choose for their patients. |
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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 122 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 24 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 15% |
| Other | 13 | 11% |
| Researcher | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 15% |
| Unknown | 32 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 21% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 16 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 7% |
| Engineering | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 15% |
| Unknown | 35 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 227. 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 12 November 2020.
All research outputs
#140,368
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Blood Medicine
#2
of 291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,332
of 316,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Blood Medicine
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 291 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 316,527 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 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them