↓ Skip to main content

Drug interactions and protease inhibitors used in the treatment of hepatitis C: How to manage?

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Drug interactions and protease inhibitors used in the treatment of hepatitis C: How to manage?
Published in
European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00228-014-1679-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Talavera Pons, Geraldine Lamblin, Anne Boyer, Valérie Sautou, Armand Abergel

Abstract

The first-generation protease inhibitors (PI) boceprevir and telaprevir combined with pegylated interferon have revolutionized the treatment of type-1 hepatitis C by increasing the rates of sustained virologic response. However, they induce drug interactions, and their clinical relevance is difficult to predict. This review compiles available data on drug-drug interactions (DDI) based on their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties with the aim of assisting clinicians in managing DDI METHODS: PubMed, drug interaction databases and hepatology and infectious disease conference abstracts were systematically searched using the key search terms "interaction", "hepatitis C", "telaprevir" and "boceprevir". All known interactions were compiled and reclassified according to their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic mechanisms. The state of knowledge of interaction mechanisms are reported and a therapeutic approach is proposed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 21%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Other 10 26%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 53%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Chemistry 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 4 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 July 2014.
All research outputs
#4,592,765
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
#443
of 2,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,108
of 227,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
#6
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,553 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 227,074 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.