↓ Skip to main content

Clostridium difficile Drug Pipeline: Challenges in Discovery and Development of New Agents

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, March 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 (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 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
Clostridium difficile Drug Pipeline: Challenges in Discovery and Development of New Agents
Published in
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, March 2015
DOI 10.1021/jm5016846
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angie M. Jarrad, Tomislav Karoli, Mark A. T. Blaskovich, Dena Lyras, Matthew A. Cooper

Abstract

In the last decade Clostridium difficile has become a bacterial pathogen of global significance. Epidemic strains have spread throughout hospitals, while community acquired infections and other sources ensure a constant inoculation of spores into hospitals. In response to the increasing medical burden, a new C. difficile antibiotic, fidaxomicin, was approved in 2011 for the treatment of C. difficile-associated diarrhea. Rudimentary fecal transplants are also being trialed as effective treatments. Despite these advances, therapies that are more effective against C. difficile spores, less damaging to the resident gastrointestinal microbiome, and that reduce recurrent disease are still desperately needed. However, bringing a new treatment for C. difficile infection to market involves particular challenges. This review covers the current drug discovery pipeline, including both small molecule and biologic therapies, and highlights the challenges associated with in vitro and in vivo models of C. difficile infection for drug screening and lead optimization.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 3 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 135 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 18%
Researcher 23 16%
Student > Master 20 14%
Other 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 29 21%
Unknown 23 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 29 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 9%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 26 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 25 June 2020.
All research outputs
#4,103,843
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
#6,126
of 22,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,150
of 263,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
#43
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 263,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 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.