↓ Skip to main content

A consensus statement on the renal monitoring of Australian patients receiving tenofovir based antiviral therapy for HIV/HBV infection

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS Research and Therapy, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
A consensus statement on the renal monitoring of Australian patients receiving tenofovir based antiviral therapy for HIV/HBV infection
Published in
AIDS Research and Therapy, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1742-6405-11-35
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen G Holt, David M Gracey, Miriam T Levy, David W Mudge, Ashley B Irish, Rowan G Walker, Richard Baer, Jacob Sevastos, Riaz Abbas, Mark A Boyd

Abstract

A number of antiviral agents used against Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection and hepatitis B virus (HBV) mono or co-infection have been associated with real nephrotoxicity (including tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), atazanavir, indinavir and lopinavir) or apparent changes in renal function (e.g. cobicistat, ritonavir, rilpivirine and dolutegravir). Patients with HIV are at higher risk of acute and chronic renal dysfunction, so baseline assessment and ongoing monitoring of renal function is an important part of routine management of patients with HIV. Given the paucity of evidence in this area, we sought to establish a consensus view on how routine monitoring could be performed in Australian patients on ART regimens, especially those involving TDF. A group of nephrologists and prescribers (an HIV physician and a hepatologist) were assembled by Gilead to discuss practical and reasonable renal management strategies for patients particularly those on TDF-based combination regimens (in the case of those with HIV-infection) or on TDF-monotherapy (in the case of HBV-mono infection). The group considered which investigations should be performed as part of routine practice, their frequency, and when specialist renal referral is warranted. The algorithm presented suggests testing for serum creatinine along with plasma phosphate and an assessment of urinary protein (rather than albumin) and glucose. Here we advocate baseline tests of renal function at initiation of therapy. If creatinine excretion inhibitors (e.g. cobicistat or rilpivirine) are used as part of the ART regimen, we suggest creatinine is rechecked at 4 weeks and this value used as the new baseline. Repeat testing is suggested at 3-monthly intervals for a year and then at least yearly thereafter if no abnormalities are detected. In patients with abnormal baseline results, renal function assessment should be performed at least 6 monthly. In HBV mono-infected patients advocate that a similar testing protocol may be logical.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Other 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Professor 3 9%
Other 7 22%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 50%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 6 19%
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 10 November 2014.
All research outputs
#20,242,136
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from AIDS Research and Therapy
#493
of 549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#217,422
of 260,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS Research and Therapy
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 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 549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. 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 260,467 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 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.