↓ Skip to main content

Acute Toxicity and Quality of Life in Patients With Prostate Cancer Treated With Protons or Carbon Ions in a Prospective Randomized Phase II Study—The IPI Trial

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
126 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.
Article details
Title
Acute Toxicity and Quality of Life in Patients With Prostate Cancer Treated With Protons or Carbon Ions in a Prospective Randomized Phase II Study—The IPI Trial
Published in
International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, February 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.02.025
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare safety and feasibility of proton therapy with that of carbon ion therapy in hypofractionated raster-scanned irradiation of the prostate, in a prospective randomized phase 2 trial. In this trial, 92 patients with localized prostate cancer were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive either proton therapy (arm A) or carbon ion therapy (arm B) and treated with a total dose of 66 Gy(relative biological effectiveness [RBE]) administered in 20 fractions (single dose of 3.3 Gy[RBE]). Patients were stratified by the use of antihormone therapy. Primary endpoint was the combined assessment of safety and feasibility. Secondary endpoints were specific toxicities, prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and quality of life (QoL). Ninety-one patients completed therapy and have had a median follow-up of 22.3 months. Among acute genitourinary toxicities, grade 1 cystitis rates were 34.1% (39.1% in A; 28.9% in B) and 17.6% grade 2 (21.7% in A; 13.3% in B). Seven patients (8%) required urinary catheterization during treatment due to urinary retention, 5 of whom were in arm A. Regarding acute gastrointestinal toxicities, 2 patients treated with protons developed grade 3 rectal fistulas. Grade 1 radiation proctitis occurred in 12.1% (13.0% in A; 11.1% in B) and grade 2 in 5.5% (8.7% in A; 2.2% in B). No statistically significant differences in toxicity profiles between arms were found. Reduced QoL was evident mainly in fatigue, pain, and urinary symptoms during therapy and 6 weeks thereafter. All European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and -PR25 scores improved during follow-up. Hypofractionated irradiation using either carbon ions or protons results in comparable acute toxicities and QoL parameters. We found that hypofractionated particle irradiation is feasible and may be safe. Due to the occurrence of gel in the rectal wall and the consecutive occurrence of 2 rectal fistulas, we stopped using the insertion of spacer gel. Longer follow-up is necessary for evaluation of PFS and OS. (Ion Prostate Irradiation (IPI); NCT01641185; ClinicalTrials.gov.).

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 126 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 17%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 8 6%
Other 29 23%
Unknown 34 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 35%
Physics and Astronomy 10 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 6%
Engineering 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 45 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 10 December 2021.
All research outputs
#7,275,005
of 34,447,360 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
#3,615
of 15,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,213
of 456,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
#44
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,447,360 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,486 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
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 456,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.