↓ Skip to main content

A retrospective evaluation of chemotherapy dose intensity and supportive care for early-stage breast cancer in a curative setting

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
A retrospective evaluation of chemotherapy dose intensity and supportive care for early-stage breast cancer in a curative setting
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, June 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10549-013-2582-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gary H. Lyman, David C. Dale, Dianne Tomita, Sadie Whittaker, Jeffrey Crawford

Abstract

Early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) is commonly treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy, and maintaining full-dose chemotherapy on the planned schedule is associated with improved patient outcome. Retrospective analysis of patients with ESBC treated from 1997 to 2000 showed that 56 % of patients received a relative dose intensity (RDI) <85 % (Lyman et al., J Clin Oncol 21(24):4524-4531, 2003). To determine current practice, we evaluated treatment patterns at 24 US community- and hospital-based oncology practices, 79 % of which participated in the previous study. Data were abstracted from medical records of 532 patients with surgically resected ESBC (stage I-IIIa) treated from 2007 to 2009, who were ≥18 years old and had completed ≥1 cycle of one of the following regimens: docetaxel + cyclophosphamide (TC); doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide (AC); AC followed by paclitaxel (AC-T); docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab (TCH); or docetaxel + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide (TAC). Endpoints included RDI, dose delays, dose reductions, grade 3/4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia (FN), FN-related hospitalization, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) use, and antimicrobial use. In this study, TC was the most common chemotherapy regimen (42 %), and taxane-based chemotherapy regimens were more common relative to the previously published results (89 vs <4 %). Overall, 83.8 % of patients received an RDI ≥85 %, an improvement over the previous study where 44.5 % received an RDI ≥85 %. Other changes seen between this and the previous study included a lower incidence of dose delays (16 vs 25 %) and dose reductions (21 vs 37 %) and increased use of primary prophylactic G-CSF (76 vs ~3 %). Here, 40 % of patients had grade 3/4 neutropenia, 3 % had FN, 2 % had an FN-related hospitalization, and 30 % received antimicrobial therapy; these measures were not available in the previously published results. Though RDI was higher here than in the previous study, 16.2 % of patients still received an RDI <85 %. Understanding factors that contribute to reduced RDI may further improve chemotherapy delivery, and ultimately, patient outcomes.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

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 %
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 13%
Other 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 12 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 14 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 July 2015.
All research outputs
#15,340,005
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#3,297
of 4,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,541
of 178,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#36
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,658 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 178,302 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.