| Title |
Discovery of potential drugs for human-infecting H7N9 virus containing R294K mutation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s74061 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jiao-Yu He, Cheng Li, Guo Wu |
| Abstract |
After the first epidemic wave from February through May 2013, the influenza A (H7N9) virus emerged and has followed a second epidemic wave since June 2013. As of June 27, 2014, the outbreak of H7N9 had caused 450 confirmed cases of human infection, with 165 deaths included. The case-fatality rate of all confirmed cases is about 36%, making the H7N9 virus a significant threat to people's health. At present, neuraminidase inhibitors are the only licensed antiviral medications available to treat H7N9 infections in humans. Oseltamivir is the most commonly used inhibitor, and it is also a front-line drug for the threatening H7N9. Unfortunately, it has been reported that patients treated with oseltamivir can induce R294K (Arg294Lys) substitution in the H7N9 virus, which is a rare mutation and can reduce the antiviral efficacy of inhibitors. Even worse, deaths caused by such mutation after oseltamivir treatment have already been reported, indicating that the need to find substitutive neuraminidase inhibitors for currently available drugs to treat drug-resistant H7N9 is really pressing. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 25 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 27% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 19% |
| Psychology | 2 | 8% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
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 10 December 2014.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,437
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274,278
of 369,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#30
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 369,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.