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 |
Effects on heart function of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in patients with cancer in the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction – a prospective cohort pilot study within a randomized clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Radiation Oncology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13014-014-0310-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mikael Lund, Gabriella Alexandersson von Döbeln, Magnus Nilsson, Reidar Winter, Lars Lundell, Jon A Tsai, Sigridur Kalman |
| Abstract |
BackgroundNeoadjuvant therapy for cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal (GE)-junction is well established. The pros and cons of chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy are debated, for example whether radiotherapy could impair cardiac function eliciting postoperative morbidity. The aim of this pilot study was to describe acute changes in left ventricular function following chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy.MethodsPatients with esophageal and (GE)-junction cancer enrolled at our center into a multicenter trial comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil with or without the addition of 40 Gy radiotherapy prior to surgery. Left ventricular function was evaluated using echocardiography and plasma N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP) before and after neoadjuvant treatment. The primary outcome measure was left ventricular global strain (GS). Clinical effects were assessed using repeated exercise tests. Linear mixed models were used to analyze the effects of treatment group, and the interaction between groups.ResultsA total of 40 patients participated (chemoradiotherapy, n¿=¿17; chemotherapy, n¿=¿23). In the chemoradiotherapy group there was no change in left ventricular global strain or ejection fraction but mitral annular plane systolic excursion (MAPSE) of the ventricular septum, early diastolic filling velocity (E-veloci ty), and the ratio of early to late ventricular filling velocities (E/A ratio) all decreased significantly (p¿=¿0.02, p¿=¿0.01, and p¿=¿0.03, respectively). No changes were observed in the chemotherapy group. There was a trend towards an interaction effect for MAPSE sept and E (p¿=¿0.09 and p¿=¿0.09). NT-proBNP increased following chemoradiotherapy (p¿=¿0.009) but not after chemotherapy (p¿=¿0.53), and there was a trend towards an interaction effect (p¿=¿0.07). Working capacity decreased in both groups following neoadjuvant treatment (chemoradiotherapy p¿=¿0.001, chemotherapy p¿=¿0.03) and was more pronounced after chemoradiotherapy with a trend towards an interaction effect (p¿=¿0.10).ConclusionsNeoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy but not chemotherapy before surgery for cancer of the esophagus or GE-junction seems to induce an acute negative effect on both systolic and diastolic left ventricular function. Future studies on neoadjuvant treatment for esophageal cancer are suggested to add measurements of cardiac function.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov NCT01362127. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Guatemala | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 123 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 11% |
| Researcher | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 18% |
| Unknown | 37 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Unknown | 49 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 January 2015.
All research outputs
#15,315,142
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,040
of 2,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,322
of 353,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#47
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,052 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 353,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.