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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Dabrafenib plus trametinib for compassionate use in metastatic melanoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medicine (Wolters Kluwer), December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1097/md.0000000000009523 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Salvador Martín Algarra, Virtudes Soriano, Luis Fernández-Morales, Miguel-Ángel Berciano-Guerrero, Karmele Mujika, José Luis Manzano, Teresa Puértolas Hernández, Ainara Soria, Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu, Enrique Espinosa Arranz, Javier Medina Martínez, Ivan Márquez-Rodas, Jordi Rubió-Casadevall, María Eugenia Ortega, José Miguel Jurado García, María José Lecumberri Biurrun, Isabel Palacio, María Rodríguez de la Borbolla Artacho, Javier Pérez Altozano, Victoria Eugenia Castellón Rubio, Almudena García, Pablo Luna, Anabel Ballesteros, Ovidio Fernández, Jose Antonio López Martín, Alfonso Berrocal, Ana Arance |
| Abstract |
The main objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dabrafenib alone or combined with trametinib for compassionate use in patients with metastatic melanoma.This retrospective, observational study involved 135 patients with unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma from an expanded-access program at 30 Spanish centers.Forty-eight patients received dabrafenib monotherapy and 87 received combination dabrafenib and trametinib; 4.4% and 95.6% of the patients had stage IIIC and IV melanoma, respectively. All patients showed BRAF mutations in their primary or metastatic lesions; 3 were positive for V600K while the remainder had V600E or V600+. A positive response to treatment was reported in 89.3% of the patients. Overall survival rates at 12 and 24 months were 59.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.5-68.9%) and 36.4% (95% CI, 27.8-45%), respectively. Progression-free survival rates at 12 and 24 months were 39.3% (95% CI, 31.1-47.5%) and 21.6% (95% CI, 14.5-28.7%), respectively. Fifty-seven patients (42.2%) reported cutaneous toxicity of any type, mainly hyperkeratosis (14.8%) and rash (11.9%). The most frequent adverse events were pyrexia (27.4%), asthenia (19.3%), arthralgia (16.9%), and diarrhoea (13.2%).Our results suggest that both dabrafenib alone or in combination with trametinib are effective for compassionate use in terms of response and/or survival rates. However, differences in patients' prognostic features ought to be considered. No new findings were revealed regarding the safety profiles of either regimen. This is the first study to evaluate the efficacy of these 2 selective BRAF and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase inhibitors in a real-world setting in Spain. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 17% |
| Librarian | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 22% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 50% |
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 07 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,930,935
of 25,707,225 outputs
Outputs from Medicine (Wolters Kluwer)
#9,718
of 16,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#345,211
of 451,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine (Wolters Kluwer)
#273
of 499 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,707,225 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,451 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 451,168 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 499 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.