↓ Skip to main content

Impact of 68Ga-PSMA-PET imaging on target volume definition and guidelines in radiation oncology - a patterns of failure analysis in patients with primary diagnosis of prostate cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Impact of 68Ga-PSMA-PET imaging on target volume definition and guidelines in radiation oncology - a patterns of failure analysis in patients with primary diagnosis of prostate cancer
Published in
Radiation Oncology, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13014-018-0977-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

K. Schiller, M. Devecka, T. Maurer, M. Eiber, J. Gschwend, M. Schwaiger, S. E. Combs, G. Habl

Abstract

68 Ga-PSMA-PET-imaging has proven to be a highly sensitive and specific diagnostic element for patients with prostate cancer (PC). Does the standard clinical target volume (CTV) cover the majority of68Ga-PSMA-PET detected lymph nodes (LNs) in a primary setting? 25 out of 159 patients with primary PC who underwent68Ga-PSMA-PET-imaging were analyzed in the process of this study. These 25 high-risk patients had a total of 126 LNs with positive68Ga-PSMA-ligand uptake. A standard CTV according to the 'Radiation Therapy Oncology Group' consensus was delineated and LNs were judged whether they were in- or outside of this target volume. With a Pearson correlation we additionally evaluated whether the Gleason score, the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value or the risk according to the Roach formula correlate with a higher chance of LNs being outside of the CTV in uncommon LN locations. 81 (64.3%) of 126 LNs were covered by the CTV with a complete coverage of all positive LNs inside the respective radiation volume in 11 of 25 patients (44%). LNs that were not covered by the CTV included (para-aortic,) common-iliac, pre-sacral, obturatoric, para-rectal, para-vesical and pre-acetabular locations. In a statistical analysis neither the Gleason score, nor the PSA value, nor the calculated risk with the Roach formula correlated with LNs being inside or outside of the CTV in this patient group. 68 Ga-PSMA-PET-imaging proves to be a valuable asset for patients and physicians for primary diagnosis and treatment planning. In our study, trusting the RTOG consensus for CTV delineation would have led to up to 35.7% of all LNs not to be included in the clinical radiation volume, which might have resulted in insufficient radiation dose coverage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 4 8%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 19 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 20 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 November 2018.
All research outputs
#4,496,315
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#168
of 2,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,158
of 331,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#8
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 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 2,073 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 331,156 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.