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 |
Delayed rhabdomyolysis with paclitaxel, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide regimen: a case report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Case Reports, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13256-017-1272-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexandra Sokolova, Onyee Chan, Waqas Ullah, Auon Abbas Hamdani, Faiz Anwer |
| Abstract |
High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue is commonly used for the treatment of relapsed germ cell tumors. We report the first case of delayed rhabdomyolysis with paclitaxel, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide regimen. We report a case of a 21-year-old African-American man diagnosed with relapsed non-seminomatous germ cell tumor who received high-dose chemotherapy with carboplatin and etoposide following TIGER trial arm B off-protocol. His course was complicated by muscle pain and rhabdomyolysis after cycle 4 on day +12 after infusion of autologous stem cells. To the best of our knowledge, this complication has not been reported with this regimen. A differential diagnosis of sepsis and neutropenic fever along with side effects of high-dose chemotherapy were considered, but based on the timing of events, it was concluded that the etiology of rhabdomyolysis is high-dose chemotherapy. Rhabdomyolysis was successfully treated with hydration and did not recur during subsequent cycle 5. Delayed rhabdomyolysis after high-dose chemotherapy with paclitaxel, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide regimen has not been previously reported and needs to be considered for preventive strategy and prompt diagnosis and treatment to avoid renal complications. Physicians should have a low threshold to check creatine kinase enzymes in patients with unexplained muscle pain or renal insufficiency after high-dose chemotherapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
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 21 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,453,139
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1,515
of 3,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,673
of 310,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#30
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,939 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
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 310,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.