| Title |
Niraparib: A Review in Ovarian Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Targeted Oncology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11523-018-0582-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Young-A Heo, Sean T. Duggan |
| Abstract |
Niraparib (Zejula®), a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, is approved for the maintenance treatment of recurrent, epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer in patients who are in complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Approval was based on the results of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III NOVA trial. In NOVA, niraparib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (primary endpoint), chemotherapy-free interval and time to first subsequent therapy compared with placebo in patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive, high grade serous ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer. The beneficial effects of niraparib were consistent regardless of BRCA mutation or homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status. Niraparib had a manageable tolerability profile, with the majority of grade 3 or 4 adverse events being haematologic abnormalities (e.g. thrombocytopenia, anaemia, neutropenia). Adverse events were generally well managed with dose interruption or modification of niraparib. Current evidence suggests that niraparib is an effective new option with a manageable tolerability profile for the maintenance treatment of recurrent, platinum-sensitive epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer in adults, with or without BRCA1/2 mutation or HRD. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 22 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 January 2021.
All research outputs
#6,381,298
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Targeted Oncology
#85
of 556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,719
of 331,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Targeted Oncology
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 556 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 331,034 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.