↓ Skip to main content

Monitoring and Management of Toxicities of Novel B Cell Signaling Agents

Overview of attention for article published in Current Oncology Reports, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Monitoring and Management of Toxicities of Novel B Cell Signaling Agents
Published in
Current Oncology Reports, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11912-018-0694-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanna Rhodes, Anthony Mato, Jeff P. Sharman

Abstract

B cell signaling agents, including ibrutinib, idelalisib, and the BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax have become an integral part of therapy for patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. The toxicity profiles of these medications is distinct from chemoimmunotherapy. Here, we will review the mechanism of action of these drugs, their efficacy, and toxicity management. Ibrutinib use is associated with increased risk of atrial fibrillation and bleeding which can be managed using dose interruptions and modifications. Patients on idelalisib require close clinical and frequent laboratory monitoring, particularly of liver function tests to ensure there are no serious adverse events. Monitoring for infections is important in patients on both idelalisib and ibrutinib. Venetoclax requires close clinical and laboratory monitoring to prevent significant tumor lysis. Targeted B cell receptor therapies each have unique side effect profiles which require careful clinical monitoring. As we continue to use these therapies, optimal management strategies will continue to be elucidated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Unspecified 2 7%
Librarian 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 9 32%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 39%
Unspecified 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 7 25%
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 17 March 2019.
All research outputs
#6,673,538
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Current Oncology Reports
#269
of 924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,849
of 330,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Oncology Reports
#8
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 330,361 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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 65% of its contemporaries.