| Title |
Clinical and dosimetric study of radiotherapy for glioblastoma: three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-017-2735-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Thibouw, Gilles Truc, Aurélie Bertaut, Cédric Chevalier, Léone Aubignac, Céline Mirjolet |
| Abstract |
We aimed to compare three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for the treatment of glioblastoma. Retrospective study of 220 patients with glioblastoma, treated with 3D-CRT or IMRT, with or without surgery. Dosimetric parameters as well as clinical and survival data for the two techniques were analyzed and compared. The median conformity index was 1.53 (range 0-2.69) for 3D-CRT and 1.25 (range 0.97-2.01) for IMRT, p < 10-4. The median homogeneity index was 0.10 (range 0.03-0.32) for 3D-CRT and 0.07 (range 0.03-0.18) for IMRT, p < 10-4. There were significantly fewer acute grade 1 and 2 neurological toxicities in the IMRT group especially for edema (1.3 versus 12.4%, p = 0.017), concentration disorders (6.6 versus 19.9%, p = 0.003) and consciousness disorders (2.6 versus 13.2%, p = 0.002) although IMRT patients had a significantly worse pre-treatment neurological status than 3D-CRT patients. Median survival was 16.0 months (range 11.9-17.8) for IMRT and 13.4 months (range 11.7-15.7) for 3D-CRT patients (p = 0.542). IMRT improved target conformity and reduced neurological toxicities for patients with glioblastomas. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 45 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 42% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 19 | 42% |
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 23 February 2019.
All research outputs
#20,461,148
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#2,587
of 2,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#378,015
of 440,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#68
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,987 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 440,718 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.