↓ Skip to main content

Burosumab: First Global Approval

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Burosumab: First Global Approval
Published in
Drugs, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40265-018-0905-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yvette N. Lamb

Abstract

Burosumab (Crysvita®; Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd. and Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc.) is a fully human monoclonal antibody directed at fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23). Excessive FGF23 production has been implicated in various hypophosphataemic diseases. Inhibition of FGF23 by burosumab results in increased renal phosphate reabsorption and increased serum levels of phosphorus and active vitamin D. In February 2018, the EMA granted subcutaneous burosumab conditional marketing authorization for the treatment of X-linked hypophosphataemia (XLH) with radiographic evidence of bone disease in children one year of age and older and adolescents with growing skeletons. In April 2018, the US FDA approved burosumab for the treatment of XLH in adults and children one year of age and older. Multinational phase III trials of burosumab are currently underway in adult and paediatric patients with XLH. Burosumab is also being evaluated in the phase II setting in adults with tumour-induced osteomalacia and epidermal nevus syndrome in the USA, as well as in Japan and Korea. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of burosumab leading to its first global approval in the EU for XLH in paediatric patients.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 16%
Other 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 25 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 39%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 9%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 25 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 January 2021.
All research outputs
#7,307,276
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#1,292
of 3,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,845
of 326,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#15
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,289 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 326,937 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 60% 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 is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.