↓ Skip to main content

Utility of fosfomycin as antibacterial prophylaxis in patients with hematologic malignancies

Overview of attention for article published in Supportive Care in Cancer, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
Utility of fosfomycin as antibacterial prophylaxis in patients with hematologic malignancies
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00520-017-4040-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tanya Zapolskaya, Sarah Perreault, Dayna McManus, Jeffrey E. Topal

Abstract

Prolonged and profound neutropenia is common among hematology and hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients as a result of chemotherapy. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) currently recommend antibacterial prophylaxis in patients who are deemed at intermediate or high risk for infection. Specifically, fluoroquinolone prophylaxis should be considered for high-risk neutropenic patients. However, with prolonged and frequent exposure to fluoroquinolones, these high-risk patients may develop resistance to these agents. Patients may also have allergies or other contraindications which prohibit the use of fluoroquinolones for antibacterial prophylaxis. Unfortunately, there is no standard recommendation for alternative antimicrobial therapy in this patient population, as well as there is a lack of data to support the use of potential alternative agents. Currently, Yale-New Haven Hospital utilizes fosfomycin for antibacterial prophylaxis in patients who are not eligible for fluoroquinolone therapy. The primary objective of this study was to assess the incidence of breakthrough infections in this population receiving fosfomycin. Secondary objectives included organisms identified, types of breakthrough infections, resistance patterns, and time from initiation to onset of fever. Of the 42 patients who received fosfomycin, 25 patients with 42 admissions met inclusion criteria. A total of 8 (19%) breakthrough infections occurred during the 42 admissions. Organisms included Klebsiella spp. (5), Streptococcus mitis/viridans (2), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (1), and coagulase-negative staphylococcus (1). Infections included the following: bacteremia (7), cellulitis (1), and urine (1). Given the low rate of breakthrough infections, fosfomycin may be a potential alternative option for antibacterial prophylaxis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 33%
Other 2 33%
Researcher 1 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 3 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 29 July 2019.
All research outputs
#1,299,188
of 13,434,955 outputs
Outputs from Supportive Care in Cancer
#234
of 2,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,164
of 385,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Supportive Care in Cancer
#18
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,434,955 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,658 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 385,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.