↓ Skip to main content

Dosimetric evaluation of total marrow irradiation using 2 different planning systems

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Dosimetry, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Dosimetric evaluation of total marrow irradiation using 2 different planning systems
Published in
Medical Dosimetry, June 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.meddos.2016.06.001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrian Nalichowski, Don G. Eagle, Jay Burmeister

Abstract

This study compared 2 different treatment planning systems (TPSs) for quality and efficiency of total marrow irradiation (TMI) plans. The TPSs used in this study were VOxel-Less Optimization (VoLO) (Accuray Inc, Sunnyvale, CA) using helical dose delivery on a Tomotherapy Hi-Art treatment unit and Eclipse (Varian Medical Systems Inc, Palo Alto, CA) using volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) dose delivery on a Varian iX treatment unit. A total dose of 1200cGy was prescribed to cover 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). The plans were optimized and calculated based on a single CT data and structure set using the Alderson Rando phantom (The Phantom Laboratory, Salem, NY) and physician contoured target and organ at risk (OAR) volumes. The OARs were lungs, heart, liver, kidneys, brain, and small bowel. The plans were evaluated based on plan quality, time to optimize the plan and calculate the dose, and beam on time. The resulting mean and maximum doses to the PTV were 1268 and 1465cGy for VoLO and 1284 and 1541cGy for Eclipse, respectively. For 5 of 6 OAR structures the VoLO system achieved lower mean and D10 doses ranging from 22% to 52% and 3% to 44%, respectively. Total computational time including only optimization and dose calculation were 0.9 hours for VoLO and 3.8 hours for Eclipse. These times do not include user-dependent target delineation and field setup. Both planning systems are capable of creating high-quality plans for total marrow irradiation. The VoLO planning system was able to achieve more uniform dose distribution throughout the target volume and steeper dose fall off, resulting in superior OAR sparing. VoLO׳s graphics processing unit (GPU)-based optimization and dose calculation algorithm also allowed much faster creation of TMI plans.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 25%
Other 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 6 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Materials Science 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 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 05 July 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Medical Dosimetry
#193
of 503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,081
of 367,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Dosimetry
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 503 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 367,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.