↓ Skip to main content

Repurposing of approved cardiovascular drugs

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
Repurposing of approved cardiovascular drugs
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12967-016-1031-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Junichi Ishida, Masaaki Konishi, Nicole Ebner, Jochen Springer

Abstract

Research and development of new drugs requires both long time and high costs, whereas safety and tolerability profiles make the success rate of approval very low. Drug repurposing, applying known drugs and compounds to new indications, has been noted recently as a cost-effective and time-unconsuming way in developing new drugs, because they have already been proven safe in humans. In this review, we discuss drug repurposing of approved cardiovascular drugs, such as aspirin, beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, cardiac glycosides and statins. Regarding anti-tumor activities of these agents, a number of experimental studies have demonstrated promising pleiotropic properties, whereas all clinical trials have not shown expected results. In pathological conditions other than cancer, repurposing of cardiovascular drugs is also expanding. Numerous experimental studies have reported possibilities of drug repurposing in this field and some of them have been tried for new indications ('bench to bedside'), while unexpected results of clinical studies have given hints for drug repurposing and some unknown mechanisms of action have been demonstrated by experimental studies ('bedside to bench'). The future perspective of experimental and clinical studies using cardiovascular drugs are also discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 121 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 15%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Student > Master 13 11%
Professor 4 3%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 41 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 19 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 7%
Chemistry 3 2%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 45 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,861,841
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,979
of 4,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,858
of 320,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#32
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,004 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 320,232 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.