↓ Skip to main content

Prospective study of postoperative whole breast radiotherapy for Japanese large-breasted women: a clinical and dosimetric comparisons between supine and prone positions and a dose measurement using a…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, September 2016
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 (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Prospective study of postoperative whole breast radiotherapy for Japanese large-breasted women: a clinical and dosimetric comparisons between supine and prone positions and a dose measurement using a breast phantom
Published in
BMC Cancer, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2794-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kana Takahashi, Madoka Morota, Yoshikazu Kagami, Hiroyuki Okamoto, Shuhei Sekii, Koji Inaba, Naoya Murakami, Hiroshi Igaki, Yoshinori Ito, Takashi Uno, Jun Itami

Abstract

This prospective study aimed to compare dose volume histograms (DVH) of the breasts and organs at risk (OARs) of whole breast radiotherapy in the supine and prone positions, and frequency and severity of acute and late toxicities were analyzed. Early-stage breast cancer patients with large breasts (Japanese bra size C or larger, or the widest measurements of the bust ≥ 95 cm) undergoing partial mastectomy participated in this study. CT-based treatment plans were made in each position, and various dosimetric parameters for the breast and OARs were calculated to compare the supine and prone radiotherapy plans. The actual treatment was delivered in the position regarded as better. From 2009 to 2010, 22 patients were prospectively accrued. Median follow-up period was 58 months. The homogeneity index and lung doses were significantly lower in the prone position (P = 0.008, P < 0.0001 and P < 0.0001, respectively). Cardiac dose showed no significant differences between two positions. By comparing two plans, the prone position was chosen in 77 % of the patients. In the prone position, ≥ grade 2 acute dermatitis were seen in 47 % of patients treated, whereas 20 % of the patients treated in the supine position had grade 2 and no cases of grade 3, although without a statistical significance of the rates of ≥ grade 2 acute dermatitis between the two positions (P = 0.28). The actual dose measurement using a breast phantom revealed significantly higher surface dose of the breast treated in the prone position than that in the supine position. Breast irradiation in the prone position improves PTV homogeneity and lowers doses to the OARs in the Japanese large-breast patients. However meticulous positioning of the breast in the prone board avoiding the bolus effect is necessary to prevent acute dermatitis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 10 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 32%
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 07 October 2016.
All research outputs
#15,334,964
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#4,105
of 8,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,272
of 322,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#67
of 162 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,328 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 322,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 162 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 58% of its contemporaries.