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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Respiratory-gated (4D) contrast-enhanced FDG PET-CT for radiotherapy planning of lower oesophageal carcinoma: feasibility and impact on planning target volume
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cancer, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12885-017-3659-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew Scarsbrook, Gillian Ward, Patrick Murray, Rebecca Goody, Karen Marshall, Garry McDermott, Robin Prestwich, Ganesh Radhakrishna |
| Abstract |
To assess the feasibility and potential impact on target delineation of respiratory-gated (4D) contrast-enhanced (18)Fluorine fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography - computed tomography (PET-CT), in the treatment planning position, for a prospective cohort of patients with lower third oesophageal cancer. Fifteen patients were recruited into the study. Imaging included 4D PET-CT, 3D PET-CT, endoscopic ultrasound and planning 4D CT. Target volume delineation was performed on 4D CT, 4D CT with co-registered 3D PET and 4D PET-CT. Planning target volumes (PTV) generated with 4D CT (PTV4DCT), 4D CT co-registered with 3D PET-CT (PTV3DPET4DCT) and 4D PET-CT (PTV4DPETCT) were compared with multiple positional metrics. Mean PTV4DCT, PTV3DPET4DCT and PTV4DPETCT were 582.4 ± 275.1 cm(3), 472.5 ± 193.1 cm(3) and 480.6 ± 236.9 cm(3) respectively (no significant difference). Median DICE similarity coefficients comparing PTV4DCT with PTV3DPET4DCT, PTV4DCT with PTV4DPETCT and PTV3DPET4DCT with PTV4DPETCT were 0.85 (range 0.65-0.9), 0.85 (range 0.69-0.9) and 0.88 (range 0.79-0.9) respectively. The median sensitivity index for overlap comparing PTV4DCT with PTV3DPET4DCT, PTV4DCT with PTV4DPETCT and PTV3DPET4DCT with PTV4DPETCT were 0.78 (range 0.65-0.9), 0.79 (range 0.65-0.9) and 0.89 (range 0.68-0.94) respectively. Planning 4D PET-CT is feasible with careful patient selection. PTV generated using 4D CT, 3D PET-CT and 4D PET-CT were of similar volume, however, overlap analysis demonstrated that approximately 20% of PTV3DPETCT and PTV4DPETCT are not included in PTV4DCT, leading to under-coverage of target volume and a potential geometric miss. Additionally, differences between PTV3DPET4DCT and PTV4DPETCT suggest a potential benefit for 4D PET-CT. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier - NCT02285660 (Registered 21/10/2014). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 60% |
| Bermuda | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 30% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 January 2018.
All research outputs
#4,220,894
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,111
of 8,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,117
of 323,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#20
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,357 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 323,110 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.