↓ Skip to main content

Effects of mistletoe products on pharmacokinetic drug turnover by inhibition and induction of cytochrome P450 activities

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
Title
Effects of mistletoe products on pharmacokinetic drug turnover by inhibition and induction of cytochrome P450 activities
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12906-017-2028-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Schink, Oliver Dehus

Abstract

European mistletoe (Viscum album) products used in cancer therapy are frequently combined with other anti-cancer-drugs. Hence, potential herb-drug interactions have become a major safety concern in mistletoe therapy. Three European mistletoe products (Helixor® A, Helixor® M and Helixor® P from mistletoe grown on firs, apple trees and pines, respectively) were tested for inhibition of nine major cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes in a test system using pooled human liver microsomes and for induction of five CYP isoforms in human hepatocytes cultivated in vitro according to the relevant guideline. Major inhibition did not occur in any of the CYP marker reactions. For some CYP isoenzymes, a minor or intermediate inhibition could be observed, but without dose effect relationship. Induction activity (≥ 1.5-fold increase) was not found with any of the three mistletoe products. Since no induction capacity was found and major inhibition above 50% did not occur even with the highest concentration used, which is approximately 100,000-fold higher than the clinically relevant dose in plasma, a clinically relevant herb-drug interaction is not expected for Helixor® A, M, and P.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 67%
Unspecified 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 33%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 December 2017.
All research outputs
#7,719,185
of 12,348,212 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#1,355
of 2,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,024
of 349,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#109
of 313 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,348,212 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,493 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 349,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 313 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 60% of its contemporaries.