↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of a software module for adaptive treatment planning and re-irradiation

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Evaluation of a software module for adaptive treatment planning and re-irradiation
Published in
Radiation Oncology, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13014-017-0943-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne Richter, Stefan Weick, Thomas Krieger, Florian Exner, Sonja Kellner, Bülent Polat, Michael Flentje

Abstract

The aim of this work is to validate the Dynamic Planning Module in terms of usability and acceptance in the treatment planning workflow. The Dynamic Planning Module was used for decision making whether a plan adaptation was necessary within one course of radiation therapy. The Module was also used for patients scheduled for re-irradiation to estimate the dose in the pretreated region and calculate the accumulated dose to critical organs at risk. During one year, 370 patients were scheduled for plan adaptation or re-irradiation. All patient cases were classified according to their treated body region. For a sub-group of 20 patients treated with RT for lung cancer, the dosimetric effect of plan adaptation during the main treatment course was evaluated in detail. Changes in tumor volume, frequency of re-planning and the time interval between treatment start and plan adaptation were assessed. The Dynamic Planning Tool was used in 20% of treated patients per year for both approaches nearly equally (42% plan adaptation and 58% re-irradiation). Most cases were assessed for the thoracic body region (51%) followed by pelvis (21%) and head and neck cases (10%). The sub-group evaluation showed that unintended plan adaptation was performed in 38% of the scheduled cases. A median time span between first day of treatment and necessity of adaptation of 17 days (range 4-35 days) was observed. PTV changed by 12 ± 12% on average (maximum change 42%). PTV decreased in 18 of 20 cases due to tumor shrinkage and increased in 2 of 20 cases. Re-planning resulted in a reduction of the mean lung dose of the ipsilateral side in 15 of 20 cases. The experience of one year showed high acceptance of the Dynamic Planning Module in our department for both physicians and medical physicists. The re-planning can potentially reduce the accumulated dose to the organs at risk and ensure a better target volume coverage. In the re-irradiation situation, the Dynamic Planning Tool was used to consider the pretreatment dose, to adapt the actual treatment schema more specifically and to review the accumulated dose.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Other 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 29%
Physics and Astronomy 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Psychology 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,628,751
of 12,359,775 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#341
of 1,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,471
of 350,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#9
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,359,775 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,287 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 350,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.