↓ Skip to main content

Primary prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections with posaconazole or itraconazole in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or high‐risk myelodysplastic syndromes undergoing intensive cytotoxic…

Overview of attention for article published in Mycoses, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Primary prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections with posaconazole or itraconazole in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or high‐risk myelodysplastic syndromes undergoing intensive cytotoxic chemotherapy: A real‐world comparison
Published in
Mycoses, January 2018
DOI 10.1111/myc.12728
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mar Tormo, Ariadna Pérez‐Martínez, Marisa Calabuig, Juan Carlos Hernández‐Boluda, Paula Amat, David Navarro, Carlos Solano

Abstract

This is an observational-retrospective study comparing the real-world outcomes associated with posaconazole vs. itraconazole as prophylaxis treatments. Two hundred and ninety-three patient admissions attributable to 174 patients were included in the study. Patients were treated with itraconazole (n = 114 admissions; 39%) or posaconazole (n = 179; 61%). Antifungal prophylaxis failure (APF) due to treatment-related adverse events (in 34 out of 293 patient admissions; 11.6%) was more frequent in the posaconazole group (6.1% vs. 15.1%; P = 0.024). There were 9 patient admissions for episodes of APF due to probable/proven breakthrough fungal infection (primary endpoint): 6 and 3 in the itraconazole and posaconazole group, respectively (5.3% vs. 1.7%; P = 0.095). All of them were associated with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA). APF was more frequent with itraconazole (65% vs. 30%; P < 0.001), along with failure due to possible/probable/proven IPA (25% vs. 10%; P = 0.002) and overall failure by any of the three different causes of prophylaxis failure (70% vs. 38%; P < 0.001). In agreement with clinical trial data, this real-world evidence supports the use of posaconazole over itraconazole in AML or MDS patients undergoing intensive chemotherapy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 17%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Unspecified 3 10%
Professor 3 10%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 45%
Unspecified 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 February 2018.
All research outputs
#13,938,946
of 24,829,155 outputs
Outputs from Mycoses
#605
of 1,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,243
of 453,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mycoses
#13
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,829,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 453,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.