↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Biological therapy of traditional therapy-resistant adult-onset Still’s disease: an evidence-based review

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Biological therapy of traditional therapy-resistant adult-onset Still’s disease: an evidence-based review
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, January 2018
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s155488
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sha Zhou, Jianjun Qiao, Juan Bai, Yinhua Wu, Hong Fang

Abstract

Biotherapy is becoming increasingly important in the treatment of adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD). The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biological therapy for AOSD resistant to traditional therapy. Database of Library of Congress, the PubMed, and Web of Science Core Collection were used to retrieve relevant articles published in English language until March 2017. Only studies published in English language were included, and the additional references quoted in these articles were also checked. Articles concerning the efficacy and safety of all the biotherapies in refractory AOSD were evaluated. There were 112 articles available in total; 422 AOSD patients were given at least one biologic. We found that 293 patients (69.43%) had received TNF-α blocking agents (infiliximab, etanercept, and adalimumab), 194 patients (45.97%) were treated with IL-1 receptor antagonists (anakinra, rilonacept, and canakinumab), 163 patients (38.63%) were given IL-6 inhibitor (tocilizumab), and 24 patients (5.69%) received rituximab and abatacept. The efficacy of biological therapy and overall tolerance of biological therapy for refractory AOSD were good. Thirty two of 271 patients given anti-TNF-α therapies (11.81%), 116 patients receiving IL-1 inhibitors (65.54%), 124 patients receiving tocilizumab (76.07%), and 13 patients given other biological therapies (36.11%) achieved remission. Side effects of biologic therapy were infections such as urinary tract infections and soft tissue abscess. Our findings suggest that anakinra and tocilizumab may be good choices for the treatment of refractory AOSD considering the effectiveness and safety.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

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 %
Other 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 59%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 8%
Psychology 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 4 10%

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 24 January 2018.
All research outputs
#11,102,662
of 12,485,238 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#861
of 922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,963
of 340,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#28
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,485,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 922 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 340,420 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.