| Title |
Intraoperative Radiation Using Low-Kilovoltage X-Rays for Early Breast Cancer: A Single Site Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-017-5934-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Melvin J. Silverstein, Melinda S. Epstein, Kevin Lin, Peter Chen, Sadia Khan, Lincoln Snyder, Lisa E. Guerra, Cristina De Leon, Ralph Mackintosh, Colleen Coleman, January Lopez, Brian Kim |
| Abstract |
Two prospective, randomized trials, TARGIT-A and ELIOT, have shown intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) to be a safe alternative to whole breast radiation therapy following breast-conserving surgery for selected low-risk patients. However, minimal data are available about the clinical effectiveness of this modality of treatment using the Xoft(®) Axxent(®) Electronic Brachytherapy (eBx(®)) System(®). A total of 201 patients with 204 early-stage breast cancers were enrolled in a prospective X-ray IORT trial from June 2010 to September 2013. All tumors were treated with breast-conserving surgery and IORT. Data were collected at 1 week, 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and yearly thereafter. With a median follow-up of 50 months, there have been seven ipsilateral breast tumor events (IBTE), no regional or distant recurrences, and no breast cancer-related deaths. One IBTE was within the IORT field, four outside of the IORT field but within the same quadrant as the index cancer, and two were new biologically different cancers in different quadrants. Three events were in patients who deviated from the protocol criteria. Kaplan-Meier analysis projects that 2.9% of patients will recur locally at 4 years. Recurrence rates observed in this trial were comparable to those of the TARGIT-A and ELIOT trials as well as the retrospective TARGIT-R trial. The low complication rates previously reported by our group as well as the low recurrence rates reported in this study support the cautious use and continued study of IORT in selected women with low-risk breast cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 12 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 53% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
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 27 September 2017.
All research outputs
#12,995,472
of 23,003,906 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#3,601
of 6,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,203
of 317,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#69
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,003,906 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 6,530 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 317,416 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.