↓ Skip to main content

Poor Sustained Virological Response in a Multicenter Real-Life Cohort of Chronic Hepatitis C Patients Treated with Pegylated Interferon and Ribavirin plus Telaprevir or Boceprevir

Overview of attention for article published in Digestive Diseases and Sciences, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Poor Sustained Virological Response in a Multicenter Real-Life Cohort of Chronic Hepatitis C Patients Treated with Pegylated Interferon and Ribavirin plus Telaprevir or Boceprevir
Published in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences, March 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10620-015-3621-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin P. Vo, Philip Vutien, Matthew J. Akiyama, Vinh D. Vu, Nghiem B. Ha, Joy I. Piotrowski, James Wantuck, Marina M. Roytman, Naoky Tsai, Ramsey Cheung, Jiayi Li, Mindie H. Nguyen

Abstract

There are limited data analyzing the effectiveness of boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR) in combination with pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) plus ribavirin (RBV) in a real-life patient cohort. In clinical trials, patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) treated with BOC or TVR plus PEG-IFN and RBV achieved sustained virological response (SVR) rates of 70 %. However, it is not clear whether similar results can be realized in routine practice. Our goal is to examine SVR rates of these triple regimens for CHC in a multicenter real-life patient cohort. We retrospectively studied 200 consecutive CHC genotype 1 patients who were initiated on PEG-IFN, RBV, and either TVR (n = 113) or BOC (n = 87) from July 2011 to February 2014 at two US academic liver clinics, a Veterans Affairs liver clinic and a community gastroenterology clinic. Both BOC and TVR treatment groups were similar in regard to comorbidities, BMI, and HCV RNA levels. BOC patients were more likely to have cirrhosis than TVR patients (47 vs. 24 %, P = 0.001). SVR rates were low in both cohorts (40 % for BOC, 53 % for TVR, P = 0.05). On multivariate logistic regression, treatment adherence by the "80/80/80 rule," diagnosis of cirrhosis, and use of erythropoietin were statistically significant predictors for SVR. Of these, treatment adherence was the strongest predictor (OR 4.43, 95 % CI 2.8-6.06, P < 0.001). SVR was much lower in a real-life patient cohort than in clinical trials (53 % for TVR and 40 % for BOC, compared to 66-75 % in clinical trials).

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 33 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 41%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Psychology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 29%
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 24 April 2015.
All research outputs
#16,172,769
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#2,920
of 4,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,744
of 266,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#28
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 266,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.