↓ Skip to main content

Gradient-based delineation of the primary GTV on FLT PET in squamous cell cancer of the thoracic esophagus and impact on radiotherapy planning

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Gradient-based delineation of the primary GTV on FLT PET in squamous cell cancer of the thoracic esophagus and impact on radiotherapy planning
Published in
Radiation Oncology, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13014-014-0304-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guifang Zhang, Dali Han, Changsheng Ma, Jie Lu, Tao Sun, Tonghai Liu, Jian Zhu, Jingwei Zhou, Yong Yin

Abstract

BackgroundTo validate a gradient-based segmentation method for gross tumor volume(GTV) delineation on 8F-fluorothymidine (FLT)positron emission tomography (PET)/ computer tomography (CT) in esophageal squamous cell cancer through pathologic specimen, in comparison with standardized uptake values (SUV) threshold-based methods and CT. The corresponding impact of this GTV delineation method on treatment planning was evaluated.Methods and materialsTen patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer were enrolled. Before radical surgery, all patients underwent FLT-PET/CT. GTVs were delineated by using four methods. GTVGRAD, GTV1.4 and GTV30%max were segmented on FLT PET using a gradient-based method, a fixed threshold of 1.4 SUV and 30% of SUVmax, respectively. GTVCT was based on CT data alone. The maximum longitudinal tumor length of each segmented GTV was compared with the measured tumor length of the pathologic gross tumor length (LPath). GTVGRAD, GTV1.4 and GTV30%max were compared with GTVCT by overlap index. Two radiotherapy plannings (planGRAD) and (planCT) were designed for each patient based on GTVGRAD and GTVCT. The dose-volume parameters for target volume and normal tissues, CI and HI of planGRAD and planCT were compared.ResultsThe mean¿±¿standard deviation of LPath was 6.47¿±¿2.70cm. The mean¿±¿standard deviation of LGRAD,L1.4, L30%max and LCT were 6.22¿±¿2.61, 6.23¿±¿2.80, 5.95¿±¿2.50,7.17¿±¿2.28cm, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients between LPath and each segmentation method were 0.989, 0.920, 0.920 and 0.862, respectively. The overlap indices of GTVGRAD, GTV1.4, GTV30%max when compared with GTVCT were 0.75¿±¿0.12, 0.71¿±¿0.12, 0.57¿±¿0.10, respectively. The V5, V10, V20, V30 and mean dose of total-lung,V30 and mean dose of heart of planGRAD were significantly lower than planCT. ConclusionsThe gradient-based method provided the closest estimation of target length. The radiotherapy plannings based on the gradient-based segmentation method reduced the irradiated volume of lung, heart in comparison to CT.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 28%
Other 5 17%
Researcher 5 17%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 14%
Physics and Astronomy 3 10%
Engineering 2 7%
Unknown 5 17%

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 06 April 2016.
All research outputs
#9,956,840
of 12,437,730 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#973
of 1,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,435
of 266,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#28
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,437,730 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,302 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 266,010 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.