↓ Skip to main content

β-lactam and β-lactamase inhibitor combinations in the treatment of extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing Enterobacteriaceae: time for a reappraisal in the era of few antibiotic options?

Overview of attention for article published in Lancet Infectious Diseases, February 2015
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
27 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
158 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
317 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
β-lactam and β-lactamase inhibitor combinations in the treatment of extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing Enterobacteriaceae: time for a reappraisal in the era of few antibiotic options?
Published in
Lancet Infectious Diseases, February 2015
DOI 10.1016/s1473-3099(14)70950-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrick N A Harris, Paul A Tambyah, David L Paterson

Abstract

The spread of extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) genes in Enterobacteriaceae such as Escherichia coli or Klebsiella spp is a major challenge to modern medical practice. Carbapenems are the treatment of choice for serious infections caused by ESBL producers; however, carbapenem resistance has increased globally. ESBL producers might be susceptible to β-lactam-β-lactamase inhibitor (BLBLI) combination antibiotics such piperacillin-tazobactam or amoxicillin-clavulanate. These drugs are frequently avoided in serious infections caused by ESBL producers because of the inoculum effect in-vitro (especially for piperacillin-tazobactam), animal data suggesting inferior efficacy when compared with carbapenems, concerns about pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic drug target attainment with standard doses, and poor outcomes shown in some observational studies. Prospective cohort data and a meta-analysis suggest that BLBLIs are non-inferior to carbapenems in the treatment of bloodstream infections caused by ESBL producers. We examine why BLBLIs are perceived as inferior in the treatment of infection with ESBL producers, and discuss data that suggest these concerns might not be strongly supported by clinical evidence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 317 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 309 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 43 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 13%
Student > Master 39 12%
Other 33 10%
Student > Bachelor 27 9%
Other 76 24%
Unknown 59 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 124 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 28 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 20 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 5%
Other 19 6%
Unknown 74 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 February 2016.
All research outputs
#1,541,212
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#1,874
of 6,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,080
of 269,755 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#24
of 89 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 6,038 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 92.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 269,755 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 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 73% of its contemporaries.