↓ Skip to main content

Translatability scoring in drug development: eight case studies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Translatability scoring in drug development: eight case studies
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/1479-5876-10-39
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexandra Wendler, Martin Wehling

Abstract

Translational medicine describes the transfer of basic in vitro and in vivo data into human applications. In the light of low rates of market approvals for new medical entities, better strategies to predict the risk of drug development should be used to increase output and reduce costs. Recently, a scoring system to assess the translatability of early drug projects has been proposed. Here eight drugs from different therapeutic areas have been subjected to a retrospective test-run in this system fictively located at the phase II-III transition. The scores gained here underline the importance of biomarker quality which is pivotal to decrease the risk of the project in all cases. This is particularly evident for gefitinib. The EGFR mutation status is a breakthrough biomarker to predict therapeutic success which made this compound clinically acceptable, and this is plausibly reflected by a considerable increase of the translatability score. For psychiatric and Alzheimer's drugs, and for a CETP-inhibitor, the lack of suitable biomarkers and animal models is reflected by a low translatability score, well correlating with the excessive translational risk in these areas. These case studies document the apparent utility of the scoring system, at least under retrospective conditions, as the scores correlate with the outcomes at the level of market approval. Prospective validation is still missing, but these case studies are encouraging.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 88 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 23%
Student > Master 16 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 6 7%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 14 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 8%
Chemistry 5 5%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 18 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 16 April 2020.
All research outputs
#6,004,838
of 22,663,969 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#891
of 3,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,789
of 156,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#13
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,954 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 156,170 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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 71% of its contemporaries.