↓ Skip to main content

Management and treatment of relapsed or refractory Ph(−) B-precursor ALL: a web-based, double-blind survey of EU clinicians

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Management and treatment of relapsed or refractory Ph(−) B-precursor ALL: a web-based, double-blind survey of EU clinicians
Published in
BMC Cancer, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1745-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah Saltman, Arie Barlev, Divyagiri Seshagiri, Ioannis Katsoulis, Vincent Lin, Beth Barber

Abstract

The prognosis for adult patients with Ph(-) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) who are refractory to treatment or experience relapse (R/R), is poor; over 90 % of these patients die from the disease, typically within a few months. While there are some national guidelines published for the treatment of adult patients with ALL, and local working group recommendations do exist, there is very little detail and no preferred treatment regimens for adult patients with R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. The aim of this study was to describe current real-world clinical practice in Europe for the management and treatment of adult R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. A web-based, double-blind survey was conducted in November/December 2013 in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. The survey was developed following consultation with specialist clinicians and a critical review of published literature. Eligible clinicians (15 per country) were board-certified in haemato-oncology or haematology; had at least 4 years of experience in their current role and had treated at least five patients with adult ALL in the 36 months before the survey, including at least one with R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. Clinicians across the five countries consulted 16 guidelines and local working group recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. Thirty three regimens for salvage therapy were reported; the most frequently cited was augmented hyper-CVAD (15 %), with vincristine the most commonly used agent. Salvage therapy regimens involved a range of agents, and most respondents reported using at least one cytotoxic agent; across respondents 10 different cytotoxic agents were cited. All respondents reported that toxicity was common for the regimens they used to treat R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL. This study provides evidence of current management and treatment patterns of R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL in the real-world clinical practice in Europe. The approach to the treatment of R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL is heterogeneous, reflecting the lack of any clearly superior chemotherapeutic option, thus it appears that clinicians are trying a wide variety of therapies. These findings show a clear need for effective, tolerable treatments for R/R Ph(-) B-precursor ALL.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 33%
Student > Master 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Professor 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Psychology 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 May 2017.
All research outputs
#7,468,281
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#2,066
of 8,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,899
of 283,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#61
of 225 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,306 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 283,725 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 225 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 70% of its contemporaries.