↓ Skip to main content

A phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of perioperative pirfenidone for prevention of acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in lung cancer patients undergoing pulmonary…

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 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 phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of perioperative pirfenidone for prevention of acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in lung cancer patients undergoing pulmonary resection: West Japan Oncology Group 6711 L (PEOPLE Study)
Published in
Respiratory Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12931-016-0398-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takekazu Iwata, Ichiro Yoshino, Shigetoshi Yoshida, Norihiko Ikeda, Masahiro Tsuboi, Yuji Asato, Nobuyuki Katakami, Kazuhiro Sakamoto, Yoshinori Yamashita, Jiro Okami, Tetsuya Mitsudomi, Motohiro Yamashita, Hiroshi Yokouchi, Kenichi Okubo, Morihito Okada, Mitsuhiro Takenoyama, Masayuki Chida, Keisuke Tomii, Motoki Matsuura, Arata Azuma, Tae Iwasawa, Kazuyoshi Kuwano, Shuji Sakai, Kenzo Hiroshima, Junya Fukuoka, Kenichi Yoshimura, Hirohito Tada, Kazuhiko Nakagawa, Yoichi Nakanishi, West Japan Oncology Group

Abstract

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) often accompanies lung cancer, and life-threatening acute exacerbation (AE) of IPF (AE-IPF) is reported to occur in 20 % of IPF patients who undergo lung cancer surgery. Pirfenidone is an anti-fibrotic agent known to reduce disease progression in IPF patients. A phase II study was conducted to evaluate whether perioperative pirfenidone treatment could reduce the incidence of postoperative AE-IPF patients with lung cancer. Pirfenidone was orally administered to IPF patients who were candidates for lung cancer surgery; pirfenidone was dosed at 600 mg/day for the first 2 weeks, followed by 1200 mg/day. Surgery was performed after at least 2 weeks of 1200-mg/day administration. The primary endpoint was non-AE-IPF rate during postoperative days 0-30, compared to the null value of 80 %, and the secondary endpoint was safety. Radiologic and pathologic diagnoses of IPF and AE-IPF were confirmed by an independent review committee. From June 2012 to January 2014, 43 cases were enrolled, and 39 were eligible (full analysis set [FAS]). Both pirfenidone treatment and surgery were performed in 36 patients (per protocol set [PPS]). AE-IPF did not occur in 37/39 patients (94.9 % [95 % confidential interval: 82.7-99.4 %, p = 0.01]) in the FAS, and in 38/39 patients (97.2 % [95 % confidential interval: 85.5-99.9 %, p = 0.004] in the PPS. A grade 5 adverse event (death) occurred in 1 patient, after AE-IPF; no other grade 3-5 adverse events were observed. Perioperative pirfenidone treatment is safe, and is promising for reducing AE-IPF after lung cancer surgery in IPF patients. This clinical trial was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) on April 16th, 2012 (REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000007774 ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 143 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 20 14%
Researcher 20 14%
Student > Postgraduate 11 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 6%
Other 26 18%
Unknown 49 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 55 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 January 2017.
All research outputs
#15,169,949
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#1,601
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,825
of 378,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#22
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 378,455 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.