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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Can combined intracavitary/interstitial approach be an alternative to interstitial brachytherapy with the Martinez Universal Perineal Interstitial Template (MUPIT) in computed tomography-guided adaptive brachytherapy for bulky and/or irregularly shaped gynecological tumors?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Oncology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13014-014-0222-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Takahiro Oike, Tatsuya Ohno, Shin-ei Noda, Hiroki Kiyohara, Ken Ando, Kei Shibuya, Tomoaki Tamaki, Yosuke Takakusagi, Hiro Sato, Takashi Nakano |
| Abstract |
BackgroundInterstitial brachytherapy (ISBT) is an optional treatment for locally advanced gynecological tumours for which conventional intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) would result in suboptimal dose coverage. However, ISBT with Martinez Universal Perineal Interstitial Template (MUPIT), in which ~10-20 needles are usually applied, is more time-consuming and labor-intensive than ICBT alone, making it a burden on both practitioners and patients. Therefore, here we investigated the applicability of a combined intracavitary/interstitial (IC/IS) approach in image-guided adaptive brachytherapy for bulky and/or irregularly shaped gynecological tumours for which interstitial brachytherapy (ISBT) was performed.MethodsTwenty-one consecutive patients with gynecological malignancies treated with computed tomography-guided ISBT using MUPIT were analyzed as cases for this dosimetric study. For each patient, the IC/IS plan using a tandem and 1 or 2 interstitial needles, which was modeled after the combined IC/IS approach, was generated and compared with the IS plan based on the clinical ISBT plan, while the IC plan using only the tandem was applied as a simplified control. Maximal dose was prescribed to the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) while keeping the dose constraints of D2cc bladder¿<¿7.0 Gy and D2cc rectum¿<¿6.0 Gy. The plan with D90 HR-CTV exceeding 6.0 Gy was considered acceptable.ResultsThe average D90 HR-CTV was 77%, 118% and 140% in the IC, IC/IS and IS plans, respectively, where 6 Gy corresponds to 100%. The average of the ratio of D90 HR-CTV to D2cc rectum (gain factor (GF) rectum) in the IC, IC/IS and IS plans was 0.8, 1.3 and 1.5 respectively, while GFbladder was 0.9, 1.4 and 1.6, respectively. In the IC/IS plan, D90 HR-CTV, GFrectum and GFbladder exceeded 100%, 1.0 and 1.0, respectively, in all patients.ConclusionsThese data demonstrated that the combined IC/IS approach could be a viable alternative to ISBT for gynecological malignancies with bulky and/or irregularly shaped tumours. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 25 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 23% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 12% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
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 23 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,166,731
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#146
of 2,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,325
of 255,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#5
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 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 2,050 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 255,780 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.