↓ Skip to main content

Surveillance radiologic imaging after treatment of oropharyngeal cancer: a review

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Surveillance radiologic imaging after treatment of oropharyngeal cancer: a review
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12957-015-0481-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven J Wang

Abstract

The increasing proportion of human papilloma virus-related oropharynx cancers has led to improved success in the treatment of this disease. However, the current low recurrence rate after treatment of oropharyngeal cancer highlights the continued need for, as well as the challenges of, designing an effective follow-up surveillance program. There are frequently multiple modalities used in the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer, resulting in short- and long-term tissue changes to the head and neck that challenge clinical distinction of recurrence versus treatment-related changes. The oropharynx subsite is characterized by complex anatomy not always accessible to physical exam, making radiologic imaging a potentially useful supplement for effective follow-up assessment. In this manuscript, the literature regarding the type of radiologic imaging modality and the frequency of obtaining imaging studies in the surveillance follow-up after treatment of oropharyngeal cancer is reviewed. While ultrasound and MRI have useful characteristics that deserve further study, PET/CT appears to have the best sensitivity and specificity for imaging surveillance follow-up of head and neck cancers including oropharyngeal cancer. A negative PET/CT is particularly useful as a predictor of prognosis and can guide the clinician as to when to stop obtaining additional imaging studies in the absence of clinical signs of recurrence. However, there is scant evidence that imaging surveillance can improve survival outcomes. Suggestions to guide future imaging surveillance research studies are provided.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 8 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Other 6 15%
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 71%
Engineering 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Physics and Astronomy 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 6 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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
#12,217,705
of 19,208,681 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#444
of 1,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,637
of 226,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgical Oncology
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,208,681 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,709 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 226,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.