↓ Skip to main content

Hypericum perforatum and neem oil for the management of acute skin toxicity in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiation or chemo-radiation: a single-arm prospective observational study

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#40 of 2,008)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 tweeters
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Hypericum perforatum and neem oil for the management of acute skin toxicity in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiation or chemo-radiation: a single-arm prospective observational study
Published in
Radiation Oncology, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13014-014-0297-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pierfrancesco Franco, Ilenia Potenza, Francesco Moretto, Mattia Segantin, Mario Grosso, Antonello Lombardo, Daniela Taricco, Patrizia Vallario, Andrea Riccardo Filippi, Monica Rampino, Umberto Ricardi

Abstract

BackgroundRadiation dermatitis is of common occurrence in patients treated with combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy for head and neck malignancies. Its timely and adequate management is of uttermost importance for both oncological outcomes and patients¿ global quality of life. In this study, we prospectively evaluated the role of hypericum perforatum and neem oil (Holoil®; RIMOS srl, Mirandola, Italy) in the treatment of acute skin toxicity for patients undergoing radiotherapy or chemo-radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.MethodsA consecutive series of 28 head and neck cancer patients submitted to radiotherapy (RT) was enrolled onto this mono-institutional single-arm prospective observational study between November 2013 and June 2014. Patients undergoing both definitive or post-operative radiotherapy were allowed, either as exclusive modality or combined with (concomitant or induction) chemotherapy. We employed a reactive, rather than a prophylactic approach, starting Holoil treatment whenever bright erythema, moderate oedema or patchy moist desquamation were observed (G2 acute skin toxicity according to the RTOG scoring scale). Holoil® was used during all RT course and during follow up time, until acute skin toxicity recovery. Twice a day applications were mostly given.ResultsThe maximum detected acute skin toxicity was Grade 1 in 7% of patients, Grade 2 in 68%, Grade 3 in 25%, while at the end of RT was Grade 0 in 3.5% of patients, Grade 1 in 32%, Grade 2 in 61%, Grade 3 in 3.5%. For patients having G2 acute skin toxicity, it mainly started at weeks 4¿5, while for those having G3, it began during weeks 5 and 6. Median times spent with G2 or G3 toxicity during RT were 17.5 and 11 days. Patients having G2 acute skin toxicity had a worsening of their dermatitis in 27% of case, with a median occurrence time of 7 days. G3 events were reconverted to a G2 profile in 100% of patients after a median time of 7 days. Those experiencing a G2 skin event were converted to a G1 score in 23% of cases after a median time of 14 days. Time between maximum acute skin toxicity and complete skin recovery after RT was 27 days.ConclusionsHoloil® proved to be a safe and active option in the management of acute skin toxicity in head and neck cancer patients submitted to RT or chemo-radiotherapy. A prophylactic effect in the prevention of moist desquamation may be hypothesized for hypericum and neem oil and need to be tested within a prospective controlled study.

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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 21%
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 6 10%
Other 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 10 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 30 September 2021.
All research outputs
#2,163,914
of 22,139,693 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#40
of 2,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,120
of 347,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#2
of 238 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,139,693 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,008 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 347,347 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 238 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 99% of its contemporaries.