↓ Skip to main content

Updates on Clostridium difficile in Europe

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 12: Immunization Strategies Against Clostridium difficile
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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.
Chapter title
Immunization Strategies Against Clostridium difficile
Chapter number 12
Book title
Updates on Clostridium difficile in Europe
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-72799-8_12
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-972798-1, 978-3-31-972799-8
Authors

Jean-François Bruxelle, Séverine Péchiné, Anne Collignon, Bruxelle, Jean-François, Péchiné, Séverine, Collignon, Anne

Abstract

C. difficile infection (CDI) is an important healthcare- but also community-associated disease. CDI is considered a public health threat and an economic burden. A major problem is the high rate of recurrences. Besides classical antibiotic treatments, new therapeutic strategies are needed to prevent infection, to treat patients and prevent recurrences. If fecal transplantation has been recommended to treat recurrences, another key approach is to restore immunity against C. difficile and its virulence factors. Here, after a summary concerning the virulence factors, the host immune response against C. difficile and its role in the outcome of disease, we review the different approaches of passive immunotherapies and vaccines developed against CDI. Passive immunization strategies are designed in function of the target antigen, the antibody-based product and its administration route. Similarly, for active immunization strategies, vaccine antigens can target toxins or surface proteins and immunization can be performed by parenteral or mucosal routes. For passive immunization and vaccination as well, we first present immunization assays performed in animal models and second in humans and associated clinical trials. The different studies are presented according to the mode of administration either parenteral or mucosal and the target antigens, either toxins or colonization factors.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 10 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 10 38%
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 01 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,461,148
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#3,986
of 4,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#378,193
of 442,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#197
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 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 4,961 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. 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 442,354 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 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.