↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Obinutuzumab treatment in the elderly patient with chronic lymphocytic leukemia

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Obinutuzumab treatment in the elderly patient with chronic lymphocytic leukemia
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/cia.s69278
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen Seiter, Aleksandra Mamorska-Dyga

Abstract

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common leukemia in adults in Western countries. Fludarabine-based regimens demonstrate higher response rates in younger patients but have a significant risk of infection and are thus poorly tolerated by older, frail patients. Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies have added to the efficacy of chemotherapy in CLL. Obinutuzumab is a potent Type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with enhanced antibody-dependent cellular toxicity and direct cell death compared with rituximab. In Phase I studies, infusion reactions and neutropenia were the predominant toxicities. Phase II studies demonstrated efficacy both as a single agent and in combination with chemotherapy in patients with CLL. The CLL11 trial was a Phase III randomized trial of chlorambucil alone or with either obinutuzumab or rituximab in elderly, unfit patients. Progression-free survival (the primary end point) was 26.7 months for patients receiving obinutuzumab plus chlorambucil versus 16.3 months for those receiving rituximab plus chlorambucil and 11.1 months for those receiving chlorambucil alone (P<0.001). Overall survival was improved for patients receiving obinutuzumab plus chlorambucil versus chlorambucil alone (P=0.002). This trial led to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of obinutuzumab in this patient population.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ecuador 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 12 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,653,708
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#1,550
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,502
of 281,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#38
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 281,399 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 43 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.