↓ Skip to main content

Carbon ion therapy (C12) for high-grade malignant salivary gland tumors (MSGTs) of the head and neck: do non-ACCs profit from dose escalation?

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Carbon ion therapy (C12) for high-grade malignant salivary gland tumors (MSGTs) of the head and neck: do non-ACCs profit from dose escalation?
Published in
Radiation Oncology, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13014-016-0657-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. D. Jensen, M. Poulakis, V. Vanoni, M. Uhl, N. Chaudhri, P. A. Federspil, K. Freier, J. Krauss, J. Debus

Abstract

To evaluate the use of high-dose radiotherapy using carbon ions (C12) on non-adenoid cystic malignant salivary gland tumors (MSGT). Between 2009 and 2013, patients with biopsy-proven non-ACC MSGT histologies of the head and neck received a combined regimen of IMRT plus C12 boost. Treatment toxicity (CTC v3), response (RECIST 1.1), control and survival rates were retrospectively analyzed. 40 patients with pathologically confirmed non-ACC MSGT (T4: 45 %; N+: 40 %; gross residual: 58 %; mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC): 45 %; adenocarcinoma: 20 %) were treated with a median of 74 GyE (80 Gy BED). Chemoradiation was given in 5 patients with MEC. Grade III acute toxicity was observed in up to 15 % (mucositis, dermatitis, dysphagia), no higher-grade late toxicity occurred to date. At a follow-up of 25.5 months, LC, and PFS at 2 and 3 years are 81.5 % (LC) and 66.8 % (PFS), OS at 2 and 3 years is 83.6 % and 72.8 %. Most frequent site of disease progression was distant metastasis. Histologic subtype correlated with LC and PFS. Resection status (gross vs microscopic disease) had no significant effect on LC, PFS, or OS. The treatment is well tolerated, no higher grade late effects were observed. Considering the negative pre-selection, LC, PFS and OS are promising. While histology and site of origin significantly influenced control and survival rates, resection status did not, potentially due to the effect of dose escalation.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 17%
Other 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 9 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Engineering 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 28%
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 08 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,810,867
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,278
of 2,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,465
of 355,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#10
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,060 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 355,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 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 52% of its contemporaries.