| Title |
Antibiotic resistance mechanisms in M. tuberculosis: an update
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Toxicology, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00204-016-1727-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Liem Nguyen |
| Abstract |
Treatment of tuberculosis (TB) has been a therapeutic challenge because of not only the naturally high resistance level of Mycobacterium tuberculosis to antibiotics but also the newly acquired mutations that confer further resistance. Currently standardized regimens require patients to daily ingest up to four drugs under direct observation of a healthcare worker for a period of 6-9 months. Although they are quite effective in treating drug susceptible TB, these lengthy treatments often lead to patient non-adherence, which catalyzes for the emergence of M. tuberculosis strains that are increasingly resistant to the few available anti-TB drugs. The rapid evolution of M. tuberculosis, from mono-drug-resistant to multiple drug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and most recently totally drug-resistant strains, is threatening to make TB once again an untreatable disease if new therapeutic options do not soon become available. Here, I discuss the molecular mechanisms by which M. tuberculosis confers its profound resistance to antibiotics. This knowledge may help in developing novel strategies for weakening drug resistance, thus enhancing the potency of available antibiotics against both drug susceptible and resistant M. tuberculosis strains. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 469 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 468 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 77 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 77 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 61 | 13% |
| Researcher | 36 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 4% |
| Other | 47 | 10% |
| Unknown | 152 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 98 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 42 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 42 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 26 | 6% |
| Other | 57 | 12% |
| Unknown | 166 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 03 November 2022.
All research outputs
#3,721,354
of 23,571,271 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Toxicology
#361
of 2,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,039
of 303,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Toxicology
#13
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,571,271 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 303,080 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.