↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacomicrobiomics: exploiting the drug-microbiota interactions in anticancer therapies

Overview of attention for article published in Microbiome, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

2 news outlets
1 blog
22 tweeters
1 Facebook page


91 Dimensions

Readers on

234 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.
Pharmacomicrobiomics: exploiting the drug-microbiota interactions in anticancer therapies
Published in
Microbiome, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40168-018-0483-7
Pubmed ID

Concetta Panebianco, Angelo Andriulli, Valerio Pazienza


Cancer is a major health burden worldwide, and despite continuous advances in medical therapies, resistance to standard drugs and adverse effects still represent an important cause of therapeutic failure. There is a growing evidence that gut bacteria can affect the response to chemo- and immunotherapeutic drugs by modulating either efficacy or toxicity. Moreover, intratumor bacteria have been shown to modulate chemotherapy response. At the same time, anticancer treatments themselves significantly affect the microbiota composition, thus disrupting homeostasis and exacerbating discomfort to the patient. Here, we review the existing knowledge concerning the role of the microbiota in mediating chemo- and immunotherapy efficacy and toxicity and the ability of these therapeutic options to trigger dysbiotic condition contributing to the severity of side effects. In addition, we discuss the use of probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, postbiotics, and antibiotics as emerging strategies for manipulating the microbiota in order to improve therapeutic outcome or at least ensure patients a better quality of life all along of anticancer treatments.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 tweeters 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 234 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 234 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 53 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 15%
Student > Bachelor 26 11%
Student > Master 17 7%
Student > Postgraduate 12 5%
Other 38 16%
Unknown 54 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 64 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 14 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 4%
Other 23 10%
Unknown 64 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 05 April 2019.
All research outputs
of 15,922,938 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
of 918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 281,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,922,938 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 281,912 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them