↓ Skip to main content

alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
21 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010968.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jian Zhang, Shengliang Shi, Yueling Zhang, Jiefeng Luo, Yousheng Xiao, Lian Meng, Xiaobo Yang

Abstract

Alemtuzumab is a humanised monoclonal antibody that alters the circulating lymphocyte pool, causing prolonged lymphopenia, thus remoulding the immune repertoire that accompanies homeostatic lymphocyte reconstitution. It has been proved more effective than interferon (IFN) 1a for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). To compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety of alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a in the treatment of people with RRMS to prevent disease activity. We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group Trials Register (1 February 2017) which, among other sources, contains records from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, PEDRO and the trial registry databases Clinical Trials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for all prospectively registered and ongoing trials. All double-blind, randomised, controlled trials comparing intravenous alemtuzumab (12 mg per day or 24 mg per day on five consecutive days during the first month and on three consecutive days at months 12 and 24) versus subcutaneous IFN beta 1a (22 μg or 44 μg three times per week (Rebif) or intramuscular injection 30 μg once a week (Avonex)) in people of any gender and age with RRMS. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We included three trials involving 1694 participants. All trials compared alemtuzumab 12 mg per day or 24 mg per day versus IFN beta 1a for treating RRMS. In CAMMS223, participants received either subcutaneous IFN beta 1a 44 μg three times per week or annual intravenous cycles of alemtuzumab (at a dose of 12 mg per day or 24 mg per day) for 36 months. In CARE-MS I and CARE-MS II, participants received subcutaneous IFN beta 1a 44 μg three times per week or annual intravenous cycles of alemtuzumab 12 mg per day for 24 months. The methodological quality was good for all three studies.In the alemtuzumab 12 mg per day group, the results showed statistically significant difference in reducing relapses (risk ratio (RR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 0.70), preventing disease progression (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.79) and developing new T2 lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93) after 24 and 36 months' follow-up, but found no statistically significant difference in the changes of Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score (mean difference (MD) -0.35, 95% CI -0.73 to 0.03). In the alemtuzumab 24 mg per day group, the results showed statistically significant differences in reducing relapses (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.62), preventing disease progression (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.84) and the changes of EDSS score (MD -0.83, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.49) after 36 months' follow-up.All three trials reported adverse events and serious adverse events. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of participants with at least one adverse event (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.08) and the number of participants who experienced serious adverse events (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.83 to 4.54). There is low- to moderate-quality evidence that annual intravenous cycles of alemtuzumab at a dose of 12 mg per day or 24 mg per day reduces the proportion of participants with relapses, disease progression, change of EDSS score and developing new T2 lesions on MRI over 24 to 36 months in comparison with subcutaneous IFN beta-1a 44 μg three times per week.Alemtuzumab appeared to be relatively well tolerated. The most frequently reported adverse events were infusion-associated reactions, infections and autoimmune events. The use of alemtuzumab requires careful monitoring so that potentially serious adverse effects can be treated early and effectively.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 14 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Master 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 5 10%
Other 15 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 18 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 29%
Neuroscience 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 6%
Other 7 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#1,603,097
of 13,190,464 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,297
of 10,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,405
of 387,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#112
of 219 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,190,464 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,519 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 387,116 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 219 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.