↓ Skip to main content

Optimal contouring of seminal vesicle for definitive radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer: comparison between EORTC prostate cancer radiotherapy guideline, RTOG0815 protocol and actual anatomy

Overview of attention for article published in Radiation Oncology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Optimal contouring of seminal vesicle for definitive radiotherapy of localized prostate cancer: comparison between EORTC prostate cancer radiotherapy guideline, RTOG0815 protocol and actual anatomy
Published in
Radiation Oncology, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13014-014-0288-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xin Qi, Xian-Shu Gao, Junichi Asaumi, Min Zhang, Hong-Zhen Li, Ming-Wei Ma, Bo Zhao, Fei-Yu Li, Dian Wang

Abstract

BackgroundIntermediate- to-high-risk prostate cancer can locally invade seminal vesicle (SV). It is recommended that anatomic proximal 1-cm to 2-cm SV be included in the clinical target volume (CTV) for definitive radiotherapy based on pathology studies. However, it remains unclear whether the pathology indicated SV extent is included into the CTV defined by current guidelines. The purpose of this study is to compare the volume of proximal SV included in CTV defined by EORTC prostate cancer radiotherapy guideline and RTOG0815 protocol with the actual anatomic volume.MethodsRadiotherapy planning CT images from 114 patients with intermediate- (36.8%) or high-risk (63.2%) prostate cancer were reconstructed with 1-mm-thick sections. The starting and ending points of SV and the cross sections of SV at 1-cm and 2-cm from the starting point were determined using 3D-view. Maximum (D1H, D2H) and minimum (D1L, D2L) vertical distance from these cross sections to the starting point were measured. Then, CTV of proximal SV defined by actual anatomy, EORTC guideline and RTOG0815 protocol were contoured and compared (paired t test).ResultsMedian length of D1H, D1L, D2H and D2L was 10.8 mm, 2.1 mm, 17.6 mm and 8.8 mm (95th percentile: 13.5mm, 5.0mm, 21.5mm and 13.5mm, respectively). For intermediate-risk patients, the proximal 1-cm SV CTV defined by EORTC guideline and RTOG0815 protocol inadequately included the anatomic proximal 1-cm SV in 62.3% (71/114) and 71.0% (81/114) cases, respectively. While for high-risk patients, the proximal 2-cm SV CTV defined by EORTC guideline inadequately included the anatomic proximal 2-cm SV in 17.5% (20/114) cases.ConclusionsSV involvement indicated by pathology studies was not completely included in the CTV defined by current guidelines. Delineation of proximal 1.4 cm and 2.2 cm SV in axial plane may be adequate to include the anatomic proximal 1-cm and 2-cm SV. However, part of SV may be over-contoured.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 22%
Student > Master 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Lecturer 2 7%
Other 7 26%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 59%
Computer Science 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 15%

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 29 July 2018.
All research outputs
#10,152,105
of 13,297,120 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#927
of 1,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,356
of 295,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#142
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,297,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,372 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 295,007 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.