↓ Skip to main content

French multicentre clinical evaluation of helical TomoTherapy® for anal cancer in a cohort of 64 consecutive patients

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
French multicentre clinical evaluation of helical TomoTherapy® for anal cancer in a cohort of 64 consecutive patients
Published in
Radiation Oncology, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13014-015-0477-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

V. Vendrely, B. Henriques de Figueiredo, E. Rio, J. Benech, S. Belhomme, A. Lisbona, E. Frison, A. Doussau, N. Nomikossoff, M. A. Mahé, G. Kantor, J. P. Maire

Abstract

To assess feasibility and toxicity of Helical TomoTherapy® for treating anal cancer patients. From 2007 to 2011, 64 patients were consecutively treated with TomoTherapy® in three centres for locally advanced squamous-cell anal carcinoma (T2 > 4 cm or N positive). Prescribed doses were 45 Gy to the pelvis including inguinal nodes and 59.4 Gy to the primary site and involved nodes with fractions of 1.8 Gy, five days a week. A positional Megavoltage Computed Tomography was performed before each treatment session. All acute and late toxicities were graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Median follow-up was 22.9 months. Fifty-four women and 10 men were treated (median age: 62 years). Nineteen patients (29.7 %) had T2, 16 patients (25.0 %) T3, and 27 patients (42.2 %) T4 tumours. Thirty-nine patients (60.9 %) had nodal involvement. Median tumour size was 45 mm (range, 10-110 mm). Seven patients had a colostomy before treatment initiation. Fifty-seven patients received concomitant chemotherapy (5-FU/cisplatin or 5-FU/mitomycin-based therapy). Forty-seven patients (73.4 %) experienced a complete response, 13 a partial response or local recurrence, and 11 had salvage surgery; among these, six became complete responders, three experienced metastatic failure, and two local failure. At least four patients experienced metastatic recurrence (concomitant to a local failure for one patient). The two-year overall survival was 85.6 % (95 %CI [71.1 %-93.0 %]), and the one-year disease-free survival, and colostomy-free survival were 68.7 % (95 %CI [54.4 %-79.4]), and 75.5 % (95 %CI [60.7 %-85.3 %]) respectively. Overall survival, disease-free survival and colostomy free-survival were significantly better for women than men (p = 0.002, p = 0.004, and p = 0.002 respectively). Acute grade ≥3 toxicity included dermatologic (46.9 % of patients), gastrointestinal (20.3 %), and hematologic (17.2 %) toxicity. Acute grade 4 hematologic toxicity occurred in one patient. No grade 5 event was observed. TomoTherapy® for locally advanced anal cancer is feasible. In our three centres of expertise, this technique appeared to produce few acute gastrointestinal toxicities. However, high rates of dermatologic toxicity were observed. The therapeutic efficacy was within the range of expectations and similar to previous studies in accordance with the high rates of locally advanced tumours and nodal involvement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 21%
Student > Master 5 21%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 46%
Unspecified 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 August 2015.
All research outputs
#14,821,227
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#904
of 2,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,994
of 264,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#41
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,055 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 264,379 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.