↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacology and Therapeutics of Asthma and COPD

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 65: Anti-IgE and Biologic Approaches for the Treatment of Asthma
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Anti-IgE and Biologic Approaches for the Treatment of Asthma
Chapter number 65
Book title
Pharmacology and Therapeutics of Asthma and COPD
Published in
Handbook of experimental pharmacology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/164_2016_65
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-952173-2, 978-3-31-952175-6
Authors

Patrick D. Mitchell, Amani I. El-Gammal, Paul M. O’Byrne, Mitchell, Patrick D., El-Gammal, Amani I., O’Byrne, Paul M.

Abstract

Current asthma treatments are effective for the majority of patients with mild-to-moderate disease. However, in those with more severe refractory asthma, agents other than inhaled corticosteroids and beta-agonists are needed both to better manage this group of patients and to avoid the side effects of high-dose corticosteroids and the social and personal hardship endured. Several biological pathways have been targeted over the last 20 years, and this research has resulted in pharmacological approaches to attempt to better treat patients with severe refractory asthma. The flagship of the biologics, the anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, omalizumab, has proven efficacious in selected subgroups of asthma patients. Tailoring asthma treatments to suit specific subtypes of asthma patients is in keeping with ideals of personalized medicine. Research in the complex interplay of allergens, epithelial host defenses, cytokines, and innate and adaptive immunity interactions has allowed better understanding of the mechanics of allergy and inflammation in asthma. As a result, new biologic treatments have been developed that target several different phenotypes and endotypes in asthma. As knowledge of the efficacy of these biological agents in asthma emerges, as well as the type of patients in whom they are most beneficial, the movement toward personalized asthma treatment will follow.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 18%
Student > Master 2 12%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 8 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Unknown 9 53%
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 13 September 2017.
All research outputs
#20,447,499
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
#573
of 647 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#331,742
of 394,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
#51
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 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 647 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. 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 394,604 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 55 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.