↓ Skip to main content

The influence of dose distribution on treatment outcome in the SCOPE 1 oesophageal cancer trial

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
The influence of dose distribution on treatment outcome in the SCOPE 1 oesophageal cancer trial
Published in
Radiation Oncology, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13014-016-0594-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rhys Carrington, Emiliano Spezi, Sarah Gwynne, Peter Dutton, Chris Hurt, John Staffurth, Thomas Crosby

Abstract

The first aim of this study was to assess plan quality using a conformity index (CI) and analyse its influence on patient outcome. The second aim was to identify whether clinical and technological factors including planning treatment volume (PTV) volume and treatment delivery method could be related to the CI value. By extending the original concept of the mean distance to conformity (MDC) index, the OverMDC and UnderMDC of the 95 % isodose line (50Gy prescribed dose) to the PTV was calculated for 97 patients from the UK SCOPE 1 trial (ISCRT47718479). Data preparation was carried out in CERR, with Kaplan-Meier and multivariate analysis undertaken in EUCLID and further tests in Microsoft Excel and IBM's SPSS. A statistically significant breakpoint in the overall survival data, independent of cetuximab, was found with OverMDC (4.4 mm, p < 0.05). This was not the case with UnderMDC. There was a statistically significant difference in PTV volume either side of the OverMDC breakpoint (Mann Whitney p < 0.001) and in OverMDC value dependent on the treatment delivery method (mean IMRT = 2.1 mm, mean 3D-CRT = 4.1 mm Mann Whitney p < 0.001). Re-planning the worst performing patients according to OverMDC from 3D-CRT to VMAT resulted in a mean reduction in OverMDC of 2.8 mm (1.6-4.0 mm). OverMDC was not significant in multivariate analysis that included age, sex, staging, tumour type, and position. Although not significant when included in multivariate analysis, we have shown in univariate analysis that a patient's OverMDC is correlated with overall survival. OverMDC is strongly related to IMRT and to a lesser extent with PTV volume. We recommend that VMAT planning should be used for oesophageal planning when available and that attention should be paid to the conformity of the 95 % to the PTV.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 20%
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 35%
Physics and Astronomy 4 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Computer Science 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 9 23%

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 04 March 2016.
All research outputs
#5,135,579
of 9,723,133 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#510
of 1,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,642
of 341,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#16
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,723,133 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,177 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 341,907 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.