↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Treatment of Cushing disease: overview and recent findings

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, October 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Treatment of Cushing disease: overview and recent findings
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, October 2010
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s12952
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tatiana Mancini, Teresa Porcelli, Andrea Giustina

Abstract

Endogenous Cushing syndrome is an endocrine disease caused by excessive secretion of adrenocorticotropin hormone in approximately 80% of cases, usually by a pituitary corticotroph adenoma (Cushing disease [CD]). It is a heterogeneous disorder requiring a multidisciplinary and individualized approach to patient management. The goals of treatment of CD include the reversal of clinical features, the normalization of biochemical changes with minimal morbidity, and long-term control without recurrence. Generally, the treatment of choice is the surgical removal of the pituitary tumor by transsphenoidal approach, performed by an experienced surgeon. Considering the high recurrence rate, other treatments should be considered. Second-line treatments include more radical surgery, radiation therapy, medical therapy, and bilateral adrenalectomy. Drug treatment has been targeted at the hypothalamic or pituitary level, at the adrenal gland, and also at the glucocorticoid receptor level. Frequently, medical therapy is performed before surgery to reduce the complications of the procedure, reducing the effects of severe hypercortisolism. Commonly, in patients in whom surgery has failed, medical management is often essential to reduce or normalize the hypercortisolemia, and should be attempted before bilateral adrenalectomy is considered. Medical therapy can be also useful in patients with CD while waiting for pituitary radiotherapy to take effect, which can take up to 10 years or more. So far, results of medical treatment of CD have not been particularly relevant; however, newer tools promise to change this scenario. The aim of this review is to analyze the results and experiences with old and new medical treatments of CD and to reevaluate medical therapies for complications of CD and hypopituitarism in patients with cured CD.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 20%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 11%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 14%
Chemistry 5 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 12 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 August 2021.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#461
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,608
of 108,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 108,269 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 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.