↓ Skip to main content

Auto-immune thyroid dysfunction induced by tyrosine kinase inhibitors in a patient with recurrent chordoma

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Auto-immune thyroid dysfunction induced by tyrosine kinase inhibitors in a patient with recurrent chordoma
Published in
BMC Cancer, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2705-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juliette Eroukhmanoff, Frederic Castinetti, Nicolas Penel, Sebastien Salas

Abstract

While hypothyroidism has frequently been reported with the use of TKIs, the thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) suppressing effect of TKIs is rare, except for thyroiditis. We describe a case with progressive recurrent chordoma who initially became hyperthyroid in a context of autoimmunity under sorafenib treatment and later under imatinib treatment. A 57-year-old man with lumbar chordoma began daily treatment of 800 mg sorafenib. He did not have any other medication or recent iodinated-contrast exposure and his family history was negative for thyroid and autoimmune disease. There was no history of neck pain, irradiation or trauma, recent fever or viral illness. Pre-treatment TSH was normal. After 18 weeks of treatment, the patient presented hyperthyroidism with positive anti-TSH receptor antibodies. More surprisingly, Graves' disease recurred during treatment with imatinib. The fact that Graves' disease occurred after two different TKIs suggests that it could be a rare but important class effect. Anti-TSH receptor antibodies should be systematically measured when TSH decreases in order to avoid the erroneous diagnosis of transient hyperthyroidism due to thyroiditis.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 13%
Student > Master 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 11 23%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 32%
Psychology 4 9%
Unspecified 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 11 23%
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 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,337,788
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#6,506
of 8,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#298,076
of 341,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#178
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 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 8,326 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. 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 341,481 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 252 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.