↓ Skip to main content

Endemic Fungal Infections in Patients Receiving Tumour Necrosis Factor-α Inhibitor Therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Endemic Fungal Infections in Patients Receiving Tumour Necrosis Factor-α Inhibitor Therapy
Published in
Drugs, July 2009
DOI 10.2165/00003495-200969110-00001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeannina A. Smith, Carol A. Kauffman

Abstract

Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha inhibitors are widely used agents in the treatment of a variety of inflammatory and granulomatous diseases. It has long been appreciated that these agents confer an increased risk of tuberculosis; however, more recently it has been recognized that patients being treated with TNFalpha inhibitors are also at significant risk for infection with the endemic fungi, in particular Histoplasma capsulatum, and when infected, to develop severe disseminated infection. Patients often present in an atypical manner and the symptoms of the fungal infection can be mistaken for those of the underlying disease. Thus, delay in diagnosis and treatment is common, and mortality has been high. In an attempt to increase awareness of this problem, the US FDA issued a 'black box' warning for clinicians in September 2008 to alert providers of the risks of endemic fungal infections in patients treated with TNFalpha inhibitors. The management of patients who develop endemic fungal infection while receiving TNFalpha inhibitor therapy should include discontinuation of the TNFalpha inhibitor and early use of antifungal agents including polyenes and/or azoles according to the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for treatment of these infections in immunocompromised hosts.

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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 5 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 June 2019.
All research outputs
#14,134,869
of 22,649,029 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#2,640
of 3,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,465
of 109,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#12
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,649,029 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,247 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 109,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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.