| Title |
Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guidelines for Rasburicase Therapy in the Context of G6PD Deficiency Genotype
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/clpt.2014.97 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M V Relling, E M McDonagh, T Chang, K E Caudle, H L McLeod, C E Haidar, T Klein, L Luzzatto |
| Abstract |
Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency is associated with development of acute hemolytic anemia (AHA) induced by a number of drugs. We provide guidance as to which G6PD genotypes are associated with G6PD deficiency in males and females. Rasburicase is contraindicated in G6PD-deficient patients due to the risk of AHA and possibly methemoglobinemia. Unless preemptive genotyping has established a positive diagnosis of G6PD deficiency, quantitative enzyme assay remains the mainstay of screening prior to rasburicase use. The purpose of this article is to help interpret the results of clinical G6PD genotype tests so that they can guide the use of rasburicase. Detailed guidelines on other aspects of the use of rasburicase, including analyses of cost-effectiveness, are beyond the scope of this document. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines are published and updated periodically on https://www.pharmgkb.org/page/cpic to reflect new developments in the field. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 2 | 29% |
| United States | 2 | 29% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 130 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 14% |
| Researcher | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 30 | 23% |
| Unknown | 26 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 25 | 19% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 22 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 30 | 23% |
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 29 October 2019.
All research outputs
#7,239,888
of 25,703,943 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#1,614
of 4,535 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,950
of 242,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#11
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,703,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,535 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 242,986 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 60% of its contemporaries.