↓ Skip to main content

3D dosimetry for cervix brachytherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 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
3D dosimetry for cervix brachytherapy
Published in
Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology, July 2015
DOI 10.1111/1754-9485.12341
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Lowrey, Sanna Nilsson, Zoe Moutrie, Philip Chan, Robyn Cheuk

Abstract

The traditional use of two-dimensional geometric prescription points in intracavitary brachytherapy planning for locally advanced cervical cancer is increasingly being replaced by three-dimensional (3D) planning. This study aimed to directly compare the two planning methods to validate that CT planning provides superior dosimetry for both tumour and organs at risk (OARs) in our department. The CT planning data of 10 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer was audited. For each CT dataset, two new brachytherapy plans were created, comparing the dosimetry of conventional American Brachytherapy Society points and 3D-optimised volumes created for the high-risk clinical target volume (HR CTV) and OARs. Total biologically equivalent doses for these structures were calculated using the modified EQD2 formula and comparative dose-volume histogram (DVH) analysis performed. DVH analysis revealed that for the 3D-optimised plans, the prescription aim of D90 ≥ 100% was achieved for the HR CTV in all 10 patients. However, when prescribing to point A, only 50% of the plans achieved the minimum required dose to the HR CTV. Rectal and bladder dose constraints were met for all 3D-optimised plans but exceeded in two and one of the conventional plans, respectively. This study confirms that the regionally relevant practice of CT-based 3D-optimised planning results in improved tumour dose coverage compared with traditional points-based planning methods and also improves dose to the rectum and bladder.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 33%
Student > Master 2 33%
Researcher 1 17%
Librarian 1 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 3 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 33%
Psychology 1 17%
Chemical Engineering 1 17%
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 29 July 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology
#810
of 1,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,447
of 275,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Oncology
#12
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,154 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 275,418 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.