| Title |
Comparative study on individual aromatase inhibitors on cardiovascular safety profile: a network meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s88179 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xihe Zhao, Lei Liu, Kai Li, Wusheng Li, Li Zhao, Huawei Zou |
| Abstract |
The third-generation aromatase inhibitors (AIs: anastrozole, letrozole, and exemestane) have now become standard adjuvant endocrine treatment for postmenopausal estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer complementing chemotherapy and surgery. Because of the absence of direct head-to-head comparisons of these AIs, an indirect comparison is needed for individual treatment choice. In this network systemic assessment, the cardiovascular (CV) side effects in using anastrozole, letrozole, and exemestane based on original studies on AIs vs placebo or tamoxifen were compared. We integrated all available direct and indirect evidences. The odds ratio (OR) of severe CV events for indirect comparisons between exemestane and anastrozole was 1.41 (95% confidence interval [CI] =0.49-2.78), letrozole and anastrozole was 1.80 (95% CI =0.40-3.92), and letrozole and exemestane was 1.46 (95% CI =0.34-3.4). OR of subgroup risk for AIs and tamoxifen were all >1 except for thrombolism risk subgroup. The results showed that the total and severe CV risk ranking is letrozole, exemestane, and anastrozole in descending order. None of the AIs showed advantages in CV events than tamoxifen except for thromboembolism event incidence. |
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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 22% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 44% |
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 23 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#2,078
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,474
of 276,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#61
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. 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 276,789 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 100 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.