↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of breast simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) radiotherapy techniques

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Comparison of breast simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) radiotherapy techniques
Published in
Radiation Oncology, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13014-015-0452-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Moamen M.O.M. Aly, Gerhard Glatting, Lennart Jahnke, Frederik Wenz, Yasser Abo-Madyan

Abstract

To dosimetrically evaluate different breast SIB techniques with respect to target coverage and organs at risk (OARs) doses. Four IMRT techniques were compared in 12 patients. Three techniques employ tangential whole breast irradiation with either two coplanar fields (T-2F), or four non-coplanar fields (T-NC), or one Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (T-VMAT) for the boost volume. The fourth technique is a fully-modulated VMAT technique (f-VMAT). Dosimetric parameters were compared for the boost and breast target volumes as well as OARs. Delivery efficiency was analysed based on number of monitor units (MUs) and estimated delivery time. T-VMAT and f-VMAT ranked highest with respect to integral assessment of boost and breast treatment quality measures. T-VMAT significantly outperformed f-VMAT with respect to ipsi-lateral lung and left-sided patients' heart volumes ≥ 5 Gy (35 % ± 5 % vs. 52 % ± 6 % and 11 % ± 5 % vs. 22 % ± 6 %, respectively). f-VMAT significantly outperformed T-VMAT with respect to ipsi-lateral lung volume ≥ 20 Gy (13 % ± 2 % vs. 15 % ± 3 %) and heart volume ≥ 30 Gy in left breast cancer (0 % ± 0 % vs. 1 % ± 1 %). T-VMAT and f-VMAT needed 442 ± 58 and 1016 ± 152 MUs, respectively. The hybrid T-VMAT is considered the technique of choice due to its balance of quality, efficiency and dose to OARs.

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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Slovenia 1 2%
Unknown 54 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 12 21%
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Bachelor 10 18%
Student > Postgraduate 7 13%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 7 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 46%
Physics and Astronomy 13 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 9 16%

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 11 July 2015.
All research outputs
#9,831,448
of 17,566,999 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#511
of 1,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,834
of 237,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,566,999 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,720 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 237,423 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 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them