↓ Skip to main content

Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2D6 and Tamoxifen Therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#42 of 3,365)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
24 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
142 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
173 Mendeley
Title
Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2D6 and Tamoxifen Therapy
Published in
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, January 2018
DOI 10.1002/cpt.1007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew P. Goetz, Katrin Sangkuhl, Henk-Jan Guchelaar, Matthias Schwab, Michael Province, Michelle Whirl-Carrillo, W. Fraser Symmans, Howard L. McLeod, Mark J. Ratain, Hitoshi Zembutsu, Andrea Gaedigk, Ron H. van Schaik, James N. Ingle, Kelly E. Caudle, Teri E. Klein

Abstract

Tamoxifen is biotransformed by CYP2D6 to 4-hydroxytamoxifen and 4-hydroxy N-desmethyl tamoxifen (endoxifen), both with greater antiestrogenic potency than the parent drug. Patients with certain CYP2D6 genetic polymorphisms and patients who receive strong CYP2D6 inhibitors exhibit lower endoxifen concentrations and a higher risk of disease recurrence in some studies of tamoxifen adjuvant therapy of early breast cancer. We summarize evidence from the literature and provide therapeutic recommendations for tamoxifen based on CYP2D6 genotype.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 173 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 28 16%
Student > Master 26 15%
Researcher 22 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 10%
Other 13 8%
Other 31 18%
Unknown 36 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 41 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 37 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 1%
Other 10 6%
Unknown 46 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. 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 15 June 2018.
All research outputs
#446,254
of 15,748,080 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#42
of 3,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,319
of 367,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#3
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,748,080 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,365 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 367,547 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.