↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

New developments in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: focus on balugrastim

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
New developments in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: focus on balugrastim
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, June 2016
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s80732
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele Ghidini, Jens Claus Hahne, Francesco Trevisani, Stefano Panni, Margherita Ratti, Laura Toppo, Gianluca Tomasello

Abstract

Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia are two major complications of chemotherapy. Dose reductions, delays in treatment administration, and the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors are equally recommended options to preserve absolute neutrophil count in case of chemotherapy regimens bringing a risk of febrile neutropenia of 20% or higher. Recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, such as filgrastim and lenograstim, have a short elimination half-life (t1/2) and need to be used daily, while others, like pegfilgrastim and lipegfilgrastim, are characterized by a long t1/2 requiring only a single administration per cycle. Balugrastim is a novel long-acting recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor obtained by means of a genetic fusion between recombinant human serum albumin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. Albumin binding increases the molecular weight and determines a high plasmatic stability leading to a t1/2 of ~19 days. Balugrastim's efficacy, safety, and tolerability have been assessed in four different clinical trials involving breast cancer patients treated with doxorubicin and docetaxel. Pegfilgrastim was chosen as a comparator. Balugrastim was noninferior to pegfilgrastim with regard to the reduction of mean duration of severe neutropenia during cycle 1. Moreover, both treatments were comparable in terms of efficacy and safety profile. Balugrastim was well tolerated, with the only related adverse event being mild to moderate bone pain. The aim of this review is to summarize the currently available literature data on balugrastim.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 22%
Researcher 2 22%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Professor 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 33%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 11%
Arts and Humanities 1 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 1 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 25 July 2016.
All research outputs
#3,222,334
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#150
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,023
of 353,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#3
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 353,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.