↓ Skip to main content

Alectinib: A Review in Advanced, ALK-Positive NSCLC

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Alectinib: A Review in Advanced, ALK-Positive NSCLC
Published in
Drugs, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40265-018-0952-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Paik, Sohita Dhillon

Abstract

Alectinib (Alecensa®) is a potent and highly selective anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Oral alectinib monotherapy is approved in the EU as first-line treatment for adults with advanced ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and for the treatment of adults with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC previously treated with crizotinib. In the USA, alectinib is indicated for the treatment of adults with ALK-positive metastatic NSCLC. The recommended dosage for alectinib in the EU and USA is 600 mg twice daily. Well-designed phase III studies in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC showed that during up to ≈ 19 months' follow-up, progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly improved with alectinib relative to crizotinib as first-line therapy (ALEX study), and relative to chemotherapy in patients previously treated with crizotinib and platinum-doublet chemotherapy (ALUR study). Central nervous system (CNS)-related outcomes were significantly improved with alectinib in both these settings. Two phase II registrational studies (NP28673 and NP28761) in patients previously treated with crizotinib also demonstrated the efficacy of alectinib, as assessed by objective response rates (ORRs), during up to 21 months' follow-up. Overall, alectinib had a manageable tolerability profile in these settings, with most adverse events (AEs) of mild or moderate severity. Current evidence indicates that alectinib is an important treatment option for patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who are previously untreated or those previously treated with crizotinib. Given its efficacy and tolerability, current guidelines include alectinib as a treatment option in these settings, with the NCCN guidelines recommending it as a preferred option for first-line therapy.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 11%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 5%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 23 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Chemistry 3 5%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 28 51%
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 23 July 2018.
All research outputs
#18,643,992
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#3,021
of 3,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,133
of 328,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#30
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 328,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.