↓ Skip to main content

Incidence of bone pain in patients with breast cancer treated with lipegfilgrastim or pegfilgrastim: an integrated analysis from phase II and III studies

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, May 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

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Incidence of bone pain in patients with breast cancer treated with lipegfilgrastim or pegfilgrastim: an integrated analysis from phase II and III studies
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00520-015-2777-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

I. M. Bondarenko, P. Bias, A. Buchner

Abstract

Lipegfilgrastim is a once-per-cycle, fixed-dose, glycoPEGylated recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) recently approved in Europe to reduce the duration of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and incidence of febrile neutropenia in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. Bone pain-related (BPR) adverse events are commonly associated with G-CSF therapy. This post hoc analysis examined BPR treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in two comparative studies of lipegfilgrastim or pegfilgrastim in patients receiving chemotherapy. A post hoc analysis was conducted using integrated data from two double-blind randomized studies in patients with breast cancer receiving docetaxel and doxorubicin and treated prophylactically with subcutaneous lipegfilgrastim 6 mg or pegfilgrastim 6 mg once per cycle. BPR TEAEs were defined as arthralgia, back pain, bone pain, musculoskeletal chest pain, musculoskeletal discomfort, musculoskeletal pain, myalgia, neck pain, noncardiac chest pain, and pain in extremity. Relationship of BPR TEAEs to study treatment or chemotherapy was also reported by the investigators. The analysis included 306 patients (lipegfilgrastim: n = 151; pegfilgrastim: n = 155). The proportion of patients experiencing BPR TEAEs was similar with lipegfilgrastim and pegfilgrastim (25.2 vs 21.9 %, respectively), as was the proportion of patients experiencing BPR treatment-emergent adverse drug reactions (TEADRs) (18.5 vs 16.8 %, respectively). No BPR TEADRs were serious, and none led to discontinuation. Nonsevere BPR TEAEs and TEADRs were observed in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy and G-CSF; rates of BPR events were similar between lipegfilgrastim and pegfilgrastim. The similar BPR safety profile of lipegfilgrastim and pegfilgrastim provides support for use in patients with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 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 > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Master 7 12%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 14 24%
Unknown 13 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 17%
Psychology 6 10%
Sports and Recreations 4 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 16 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 December 2015.
All research outputs
#14,242,087
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#2,768
of 4,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,484
of 267,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#37
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,584 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 267,037 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.