↓ Skip to main content

Antimalarial Drug Toxicity

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Safety, December 2012
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
4 policy sources
twitter
4 X users
patent
7 patents
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
399 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
223 Mendeley
Title
Antimalarial Drug Toxicity
Published in
Drug Safety, December 2012
DOI 10.2165/00002018-200427010-00003
Pubmed ID
Authors

W. Robert J. Taylor, Nicholas J. White

Abstract

Malaria, caused mostly by Plasmodium falciparum and P. vivax, remains one of the most important infectious diseases in the world. Antimalarial drug toxicity is one side of the risk-benefit equation and is viewed differently depending upon whether the clinical indication for drug administration is malaria treatment or prophylaxis. Drug toxicity must be acceptable to patients and cause less harm than the disease itself. Research that leads to drug registration tends to omit two important groups who are particularly vulnerable to malaria--very young children and pregnant women. Prescribing in pregnancy is a particular problem for clinicians because the risk-benefit ratio is often very unclear. The number of antimalarial drugs in use is very small. Despite its decreasing efficacy against P. falciparum, chloroquine continues to be used widely because of its low cost and good tolerability. It remains the drug of first choice for treating P. vivax malaria. Pruritus is a common adverse effect in African patients. As prophylaxis, chloroquine is usually combined with proguanil. This combination has good overall tolerability but mouth ulcers and gastrointestinal upset are more common than with other prophylactic regimens. Sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine is well tolerated as treatment and when used as intermittent preventive treatment in pregnant African women. Sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine is no longer used as prophylaxis because it may cause toxic epidermal necrolysis and Stevens Johnson syndrome. Mefloquine remains a valuable drug for prophylaxis and treatment. Tolerability is acceptable to most patients and travellers despite the impression given by the lay press. Dose-related serious neuropsychiatric toxicity can occur; mefloquine is contraindicated in individuals with a history of epilepsy or psychiatric disease. Quinine is the mainstay for treating severe malaria in many countries. Cardiovascular or CNS toxicity is rare, but hypoglycaemia may be problematic and blood glucose levels should be monitored. Halofantrine is unsuitable for widespread use because of its potential for cardiotoxicity. There is renewed interest in two old drugs, primaquine and amodiaquine. Primaquine is being developed as prophylaxis, and amodiaquine, which was withdrawn from prophylactic use because of neutropenia and hepatitis, is a potentially good partner drug for artesunate against falciparum malaria. Atovaquone/proguanil is a new antimalarial combination with good efficacy and tolerability as prophylaxis and treatment. The most important class of drugs that could have a major impact on malaria control is the artemisinin derivatives. They have remarkable efficacy and an excellent safety record. They have no identifiable dose-related adverse effects in humans and only very rarely produce allergic reactions. Combining an artemisinin derivative with another efficacious antimalarial drug is increasingly being viewed as the optimal therapeutic strategy for malaria.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 220 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 33 15%
Student > Master 33 15%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 11%
Student > Postgraduate 16 7%
Other 39 17%
Unknown 49 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 12%
Chemistry 21 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 16 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 6%
Other 31 14%
Unknown 64 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 08 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,648,644
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Drug Safety
#156
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,572
of 288,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Safety
#40
of 604 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 288,578 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 604 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 93% of its contemporaries.