↓ Skip to main content

Study protocol, rationale and recruitment in a European multi-centre randomized controlled trial to determine the efficacy and safety of azithromycin maintenance therapy for 6 months in primary…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
201 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
Study protocol, rationale and recruitment in a European multi-centre randomized controlled trial to determine the efficacy and safety of azithromycin maintenance therapy for 6 months in primary ciliary dyskinesia
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12890-016-0261-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helene E. Kobbernagel, Frederik F. Buchvald, Eric G. Haarman, Carmen Casaulta, Samuel A. Collins, Claire Hogg, Claudia E. Kuehni, Jane S. Lucas, Heymut Omran, Alexandra L. Quittner, Claudius Werner, Kim G. Nielsen

Abstract

Clinical management of primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) respiratory disease is currently based on improving mucociliary clearance and controlling respiratory infections, through the administration of antibiotics. Treatment practices in PCD are largely extrapolated from more common chronic respiratory disorders, particularly cystic fibrosis, but no randomized controlled trials (RCT) have ever evaluated efficacy and safety of any pharmacotherapeutics used in the treatment of PCD. Maintenance therapy, with the macrolide antibiotic azithromycin, is currently widely used in chronic respiratory diseases including PCD. In addition to its antibacterial properties, azithromycin is considered to have beneficial anti-inflammatory and anti-quorum-sensing properties. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of azithromycin maintenance therapy for 6 months on respiratory exacerbations in PCD. The secondary objectives are to evaluate the efficacy of azithromycin on lung function, ventilation inhomogeneity, hearing impairment, and symptoms (respiratory, sinus, ears and hearing) measured on a PCD-specific health-related quality of life instrument, and to assess the safety of azithromycin maintenance therapy in PCD. The BESTCILIA trial is a European multi-centre, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel group study. The intervention is tablets of azithromycin 250/500 mg according to body weight or placebo administered three times a week for 6 months. Subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of PCD, age 7-50 years, are eligible for inclusion. Chronic pulmonary infections with Gram-negative bacteria or any recent occurrence of non-tuberculous mycobacteria are exclusion criteria. The planned number of subjects to be included is 125. The trial has been approved by the Research Ethics Committees of the participating institutions. We present a study protocol of an ongoing RCT, evaluating for the first time, the efficacy and safety of a pharmacotherapeutic treatment for patients with PCD. The RCT evaluates azithromycin maintenance therapy, a drug already commonly prescribed in other chronic respiratory disorders. Furthermore, the trial will utilize the Lung clearance index and new, PCD-specific quality of life instruments as outcome measures for PCD. Recruitment is hampered by frequent occurrence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection, exacerbations at enrolment, and the patients' perception of disease severity and necessity of additional management and treatment during trial participation. EudraCT 2013-004664-58 (date of registration: 2014-04-08).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 199 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 11%
Researcher 22 11%
Student > Bachelor 21 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 9%
Other 12 6%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 73 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 80 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 March 2020.
All research outputs
#7,486,178
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#584
of 1,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,208
of 364,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#8
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 364,027 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.