| Title |
Doxofylline is not just another theophylline!
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/copd.s150887 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maria Gabriella Matera, Clive Page, Mario Cazzola |
| Abstract |
Doxofylline, which differs from theophylline in containing the dioxalane group at position 7, has comparable efficacy to theophylline in the treatment of respiratory diseases, but with an improved tolerability profile and a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio. Furthermore, it does not have significant drug-drug interactions as exhibited with theophylline, which make using theophylline more challenging, especially in elderly patients with co-morbidities receiving multiple classes of drug. It is now clear that doxofylline also possesses a distinct pharmacological profile from theophylline (no significant effect on any of the known phosphodiesterase isoforms, no significant adenosine receptor antagonism, no direct effect on histone deacetylases, interaction with β2-adrenoceptors) and therefore, should not be considered as just a modified theophylline. Randomized clinical trials of doxofylline to investigate the use of this drug to reduce exacerbations and hospitalizations due to asthma or COPD as an alternative to expensive biologics, and certainly as an alternative to theophylline are to be encouraged. |
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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 23% |
| Unknown | 10 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 23% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 18% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 September 2018.
All research outputs
#8,264,793
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,016
of 2,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,200
of 444,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#30
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 444,941 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.