↓ Skip to main content

Staged reconstruction brachytherapy has lower overall cost in recurrent soft-tissue sarcoma

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Staged reconstruction brachytherapy has lower overall cost in recurrent soft-tissue sarcoma
Published in
Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy, January 2017
DOI 10.5114/jcb.2017.65641
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arash O. Naghavi, Ricardo J. Gonzalez, Jacob G. Scott, Youngchul Kim, Yazan A. Abuodeh, Tobin J. Strom, Michelle Echevarria, John E. Mullinax, Kamran A. Ahmed, Louis B. Harrison, Daniel C. Fernandez

Abstract

Adjuvant brachytherapy (AB) with immediate (IR) and staged reconstruction (SR) are distinct treatment modalities available for patients with recurrent soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Although SR may offer local control and toxicity benefit, it requires additional upfront procedures, and there is no evidence that it improves overall survival. With the importance of value-based care, our goal is to identify which technique is more cost effective. A retrospective review of 22 patients with recurrent extremity STS treated with resection followed by AB alone. Hospital charges were used to compare the cost between SR and IR at the time of initial treatment, at 6-month intervals following surgery, and cumulative cost comparisons at 18 months. Median follow-up was 31 months. Staged reconstruction (n = 12) was associated with an 18-month local control benefit (85% vs. 42%, p = 0.034), compared to IR (n = 10). Staged reconstruction had a longer hospital stay during initial treatment (10 vs. 3 days, p = 0.002), but at 18 months, the total hospital stay was no longer different (11 vs. 11 days). Initially, there was no difference in the cost of SR and IR. With longer follow-up, cost eventually favored SR, which was attributed primarily to the costs associated with local failure (LF). On multivariate analysis, cost of initial treatment was associated with length of hospital stay (~$4.5K per hospital day, p < 0.001), and at 18 months, the cumulative cost was ~175K lower with SR (p = 0.005) and $58K higher with LF (p = 0.02). In recurrent STS, SR has a longer initial hospital stay when compared to IR. At 18 months, SR had lower rates of LF, translating to lower total costs for the patient. SR is the more cost-effective brachytherapy approach in the treatment of STS, and should be considered as healthcare transitions into value-based medicine.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 27%
Professor 2 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Researcher 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 18%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 9%
Engineering 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 July 2018.
All research outputs
#8,476,767
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy
#114
of 549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,930
of 424,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy
#3
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 549 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 424,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.