↓ Skip to main content

IL-1 Inhibition in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, December 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
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
IL-1 Inhibition in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2016.00467
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriella Giancane, Francesca Minoia, Sergio Davì, Giulia Bracciolini, Alessandro Consolaro, Angelo Ravelli

Abstract

Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) is the form of childhood arthritis whose treatment is most challenging. The demonstration of the prominent involvement of interleukin (IL)-1 in disease pathogenesis has provided the rationale for the treatment with biologic medications that antagonize this cytokine. The three IL-1 blockers that have been tested so far (anakinra, canakinumab, and rilonacept) have all been proven effective and safe, although only canakinumab is currently approved for use in sJIA. The studies on IL-1 inhibition in sJIA published in the past few years suggest that children with fewer affected joints, higher neutrophil count, younger age at disease onset, shorter disease duration, or, possibly, higher ferritin level may respond better to anti-IL-1 treatment. In addition, it has been postulated that use of IL-1 blockade as first-line therapy may take advantage of a "window of opportunity," in which disease pathophysiology can be altered to prevent the occurrence of chronic arthritis. In this review, we analyze the published literature on IL-1 inhibitors in sJIA and discuss the rationale underlying the use of these medications, the results of therapeutic studies, and the controversial issues.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 5 10%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 49%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 12 24%
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 28 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,864,450
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#6,829
of 17,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,767
of 423,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#75
of 153 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 423,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 153 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 50% of its contemporaries.