↓ Skip to main content

Determining appropriate timing of adaptive radiation therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma during intensity-modulated radiation therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Determining appropriate timing of adaptive radiation therapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma during intensity-modulated radiation therapy
Published in
Radiation Oncology, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13014-015-0498-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Huixian Huang, Heming Lu, Guosheng Feng, Hailan Jiang, Jiaxin Chen, Jinjian Cheng, Qiang Pang, Zhiping Lu, Junzhao Gu, Luxing Peng, Shan Deng, Ying Mo, Danling Wu, Yinglin Wei

Abstract

To determine appropriate timing of an adaptive radiation therapy (ART) replan by evaluating anatomic and dosimetric changes of target volumes and organs at risk (OARs) during intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Nineteen NPC patients were recruited. Each patient had repeat computed tomography (CT) scans after each five fractions and at treatment completion. Automatic re-contouring the targets and OARs by using deformable registration algorithm was conducted through CT-CT fusion. Anatomic changes were assessed by comparing the initial CT and repeated CT. Hybrid plans with re-contouring were generated and the dose-volume histograms (DVH) of the hybrid plan and the original plan were compared. Progressive volume reductions in gross target volume for primary disease (GTVnx), gross target volume for involved lymph nodes (GTVnd), and parotids were observed over time. Comparing with the original plan, each hybrid plan had no significant difference in homogeneity index (HI) for all the targets. Some parameters for planning target volumes for primary disease and high-risk clinical target volume (PTVnx and PTV1, respectively) improved significantly, notably starting from the 10th fraction. These parameters included mean dose (Dmean), dose to 95 % of the volume (D95), percentage of the volume receiving 95 % of the prescription dose (V95), and conformity index (CI) for PTVnx, and Dmean, D95, and CI for PTV1. The dosimetric parameters for PTVnd remained the same in general except for D95 and V95 which had significant improvement at specific time points; whereas for PTV2, similar trend of dosimetric changes was also observed. Dose to some OARs increased significantly at some time points. There were significant anatomic and dosimetric changes in the targets and OARs. The target dose coverage in the hybrid plans did not get worse, but overdose occurred in some critical structures. Significant dosimetric changes should be considered as a trigger point at which ART replanning is indicated. D95/V95/CI for PTV2, Dmax for the brain stem, spinal cord, right eyeball and left lens, and Dmean/V30 for the parotids and glottis were taken into account for predicting the need for ART. Two replans at the 5th and 15th fractions were suggested.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 2%
Unknown 64 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 37%
Physics and Astronomy 10 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Engineering 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 16 25%
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 17 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,291,881
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,678
of 2,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,664
of 272,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#56
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 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 2,057 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. 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 272,396 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 62 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.