↓ Skip to main content

Considerations When Treating Hepatitis C in a Cirrhotic Transplant Candidate

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Considerations When Treating Hepatitis C in a Cirrhotic Transplant Candidate
Published in
Current Gastroenterology Reports, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11894-018-0626-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly E. Daniel, Adnan Said

Abstract

This review examines the issues in determining the decision to treat a HCV-positive patient who is a liver transplant (LT) candidate with highly effective and well-tolerated direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies. Cure of HCV with DAA can improve liver function and allow delisting in some patients. Beyond a threshold of hepatic impairment (likely MELD score > 16 to 20), patients may experience a decline in MELD score with HCV cure without improvement in liver-related complications resulting in decreased opportunity to receive a LT. Eradicating HCV from patients who need LT regardless also deprives them of the option of receiving HCV-positive donor organs. Patients with MELD > 16 or Child-Pugh B/C may also have reduced cure rates of HCV, increased risk of hepatic decompensation, and adverse events with DAA pre-LT compared to post-LT DAA therapy. Preliminary data demonstrates increase risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after treatment with DAA with subsequent studies raising doubts about this association. Patients with HCV cirrhosis on the LT waiting list with MELD score > 16, CTP-B/C, and HCC are best treated after LT with better response, tolerability, and the ability to receive organs from a larger donor pool that includes HCV-positive donors. Larger, prospective studies are needed to assess whether increased HCC recurrence after DAA is a true effect.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 27%
Student > Master 5 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 April 2018.
All research outputs
#20,726,252
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Current Gastroenterology Reports
#298
of 368 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,369
of 343,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Gastroenterology Reports
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 368 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 343,618 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them