↓ Skip to main content

IMRT delivers lower radiation doses to dental structures than 3DRT in head and neck cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, September 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 (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
IMRT delivers lower radiation doses to dental structures than 3DRT in head and neck cancer patients
Published in
Radiation Oncology, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13014-016-0694-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eduardo Rodrigues Fregnani, Cláudia Joffily Parahyba, Karina Morais-Faria, Felipe Paiva Fonseca, Pedro Augusto Mendes Ramos, Fábio Yone de Moraes, Karina Gondim Moutinho da Conceição Vasconcelos, Gisela Menegussi, Alan Roger Santos-Silva, Thais B. Brandão

Abstract

Radiotherapy (RT) is frequently used in the treatment of head and neck cancer, but different side-effects are frequently reported, including a higher frequency of radiation-related caries, what may be consequence of direct radiation to dental tissue. The intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was developed to improve tumor control and decrease patient's morbidity by delivering radiation beams only to tumor shapes and sparing normal tissue. However, teeth are usually not included in IMRT plannings and the real efficacy of IMRT in the dental context has not been addressed. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess whether IMRT delivers lower radiation doses to dental structures than conformal 3D radiotherapy (3DRT). Radiation dose delivery to dental structures of 80 patients treated for head and neck cancers (oral cavity, tongue, nasopharynx and oropharynx) with IMRT (40 patients) and 3DRT (40 patients) were assessed by individually contouring tooth crowns on patients' treatment plans. Clinicopathological data were retrieved from patients' medical files. The average dose of radiation to teeth delivered by IMRT was significantly lower than with 3DRT (p = 0.007); however, only patients affected by nasopharynx and oral cavity cancers demonstrated significantly lower doses with IMRT (p = 0.012 and p = 0.011, respectively). Molars received more radiation with both 3DRT and IMRT, but the latter delivered significantly lower radiation in this group of teeth (p < 0.001), whereas no significant difference was found for the other dental groups. Maxillary teeth received lower doses than mandibular teeth, but only IMRT delivered significantly lower doses (p = 0.011 and p = 0.003). Ipsilateral teeth received higher doses than contralateral teeth with both techniques and IMRT delivered significantly lower radiation than 3DRT for contralateral dental structures (p < 0.001). IMRT delivered lower radiation doses to teeth than 3DRT, but only for some groups of patients and teeth, suggesting that this decrease was more likely due to the protection of other high risk organs, and was not enough to remove teeth from the zone of high risk for radiogenic disturbance (>30Gy).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 20%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 25 33%
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 08 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,208,077
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#798
of 2,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,931
of 334,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#10
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,060 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 334,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.