| Title |
Efficacy and safety of tenofovir in a kidney transplant patient with chronic hepatitis B and nucleos(t)ide multidrug resistance: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Case Reports, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1752-1947-8-281 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chun Shan, Guo Qing Yin, Pei Wu |
| Abstract |
Five nucleos(t)ide analogs are used to treat chronic hepatitis B. Ideal nucleos(t)ide analog therapy in chronic hepatitis B patients with kidney transplantation must ensure virological suppression and minimize renal injury. However, resistance to nucleos(t)ide analogs frequently results in virological breakthrough, hepatitis flare, and complicated deterioration of the transplanted kidney. Inappropriate rescue therapy for drug resistance may subsequently cause hepatitis B virus multidrug resistance. Currently, tenofovir is used to treat chronic hepatitis B patients with kidney transplantation. In the field, we first reported combination therapy with tenofovir plus entecavir in a kidney transplant chronic hepatitis B patient with nucleos(t)ide analog multidrug resistance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 57% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
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 16 May 2015.
All research outputs
#17,725,418
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1,900
of 3,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,885
of 235,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#32
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,904 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 235,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.