↓ Skip to main content

Dosimetric comparison of carbon ion radiotherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy with photon beams for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Dosimetric comparison of carbon ion radiotherapy and stereotactic body radiotherapy with photon beams for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma
Published in
Radiation Oncology, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13014-015-0491-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takanori Abe, Jun-ichi Saitoh, Daijiro Kobayashi, Kei Shibuya, Yoshinori Koyama, Hirohumi Shimada, Katsuyuki Shirai, Tatsuya Ohno, Takashi Nakano

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare carbon ion radiotherapy (C-ion RT) and stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) with photon beams for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), specifically with regard to the dose volume parameters for target coverage and normal tissue sparing. Data of 10 patients who were treated using C-ion RT with a total dose of 60 Gy(RBE) in four fractions were used. The virtual plan of SBRT was simulated on the treatment planning computed tomography images of C-ion RT. Dose volume parameters such as minimum dose covering 90 % of the planning target volume (PTV D90), homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), mean liver dose (MLD), volume of the liver receiving 5 to 60 Gy (V5-60), and max point dose (Dmax) of gastrointestinal (GI) tract were calculated from both treatment plans. The PTV D90 was 59.6 ± 0.2 Gy(RBE) in C-ion RT, as compared to 56.6 ± 0.3 Gy in SBRT (p < 0.05). HI and CI were 1.19 ± 0.03 and 0.79 ± 0.06, respectively in C-ion RT, as compared to 1.21 ± 0.01 and 0.37 ± 0.02, respectively in SBRT. Only CI showed a significant difference between two modalities. Mean liver dose was 8.1 ± 1.4 Gy(RBE) in C-ion RT, as compared to 16.1 ± 2.5 Gy in SBRT (p < 0.05). V5 to V50 of liver were higher in SBRT than C-ion RT and significant differences were observed for V5, V10 and V20. Dmax of the GI tract was higher in SBRT than C-ion RT, but did not show a significantly difference. C-ion RT provides an advantage in both target conformity and normal liver sparing compared with SBRT.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 16%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Other 4 9%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 35%
Physics and Astronomy 7 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Engineering 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 May 2016.
All research outputs
#5,583,618
of 7,747,098 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#750
of 1,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,475
of 232,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#51
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,747,098 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,053 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 232,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.