↓ Skip to main content

Acute rhabdomyolysis with severe polymyositis following ipilimumab-nivolumab treatment in a cancer patient with elevated anti-striated muscle antibody

Overview of attention for article published in Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Acute rhabdomyolysis with severe polymyositis following ipilimumab-nivolumab treatment in a cancer patient with elevated anti-striated muscle antibody
Published in
Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40425-016-0139-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mehmet Asim Bilen, Sumit K. Subudhi, Jianjun Gao, Nizar M. Tannir, Shi-Ming Tu, Padmanee Sharma

Abstract

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer therapy since these drugs target inhibitory pathways on T cells, which result in durable anti-tumor immune responses and significant overall survival for a subset of cancer patients. These drugs can also lead to toxicities, which require additional research to identify mechanisms of toxicities and biomarkers that can help to identify patients who will develop immune-related adverse events. We describe the first case, to our knowledge, of a patient with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who developed acute rhabdomyolysis with severe polymyositis after treatment with combination immunotherapy consisting of ipilimumab plus nivolumab (Trial registration: NCT01928394. Registered: 8/21/2013). We found that this patient had an elevated pre-existing anti-striated muscle antibody titer, which was likely exacerbated with the immunotherapy treatment thereby resulting in the presentation of acute rhabdomyolysis and severe polymyositis. This case suggests that immune-related adverse events may be linked to subclinical autoimmune conditions which highlights the need for additional studies to identify patients who are at risk for toxicities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 19%
Other 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 18 27%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 51%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 11 16%

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 10 November 2016.
All research outputs
#9,882,313
of 12,380,442 outputs
Outputs from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#521
of 572 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,955
of 267,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#31
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,380,442 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 572 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% 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 267,063 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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.