↓ Skip to main content

Prophylactic long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) in gynecologic malignancies: an oncologic expert statement

Overview of attention for article published in Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
Title
Prophylactic long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) in gynecologic malignancies: an oncologic expert statement
Published in
Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10354-015-0392-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edgar Petru, Christian F. Singer, Stephan Polterauer, Arik Galid, Christian Schauer, Johann Klocker, Michael Seifert, Alexander Reinthaller, Christoph Benedicic, Michael Hubalek, Lukas Hefler, Christian Marth, Tonja Scholl-Firon, Gerhard Bogner, Alain-Gustave Zeimet

Abstract

We reviewed the status of the use of the prophylactic long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) pegfilgrastim and lipegfilgrastim in gynecologic malignancies. Long-acting G-CSFs should not be used in weekly regimens. Filgrastim is not indicated in patients with febrile and/or severe neutropenia after administration of long-acting G-CSF in the same cycle. One study has shown a moderate effect on febrile neutropenia of ciprofloxacin when co-administered with pegfilgrastim. There is broad evidence from meta-analyses that pegfilgrastim effectively reduces severe neutropenia. In parallel, its adverse effects have been studied extensively. All-cause mortality was significantly reduced by pegfilgrastim. The glycopegylated long-acting G-CSF, lipegfilgrastim has demonstrated antineutropenic efficacy similar to that of pegfilgrastimin in one breast cancer study. In another pivitol non-small cell lung cancer study, impaired survival was observed in the lipegfilgrastim group during the first 30 days of study. The European Medicines Agency claimed more profound safety data to be provided for lipegfilgrastim by 2017.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 1 33%
Other 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 67%
Unknown 1 33%
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 17 October 2015.
All research outputs
#21,186,729
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift
#358
of 436 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,473
of 281,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 436 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 281,517 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.