↓ Skip to main content

Proposal of a post-prostatectomy clinical target volume based on pre-operative MRI: volumetric and dosimetric comparison to the RTOG guidelines

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 and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Proposal of a post-prostatectomy clinical target volume based on pre-operative MRI: volumetric and dosimetric comparison to the RTOG guidelines
Published in
Radiation Oncology, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13014-014-0303-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Croke, Jillian Maclean, Balazs Nyiri, Yan Li, Kyle Malone, Leonard Avruch, Cathleen Kayser, Shawn Malone

Abstract

BackgroundRecurrence rates following radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the post-operative adjuvant or salvage setting remain substantial. Previous work from our institution demonstrated that published prostate bed CTV guidelines frequently do not cover the pre-operative MRI defined prostate. Inadequate target delineation may contribute to the high recurrence rates, but increasing target volumes may increase dose to organs at risk.MethodsWe propose guidelines for delineating post-prostatectomy target volumes based upon an individual¿s co-registered pre-operative MRI. MRI-based CTVs and PTVs were compared to those created using the RTOG guidelines in 30 patients. Contours were analysed in terms of absolute volume, intersection volume (Jaccard Index) and the ability to meet the RADICALS and QUANTEC rectal and bladder constraints (tomotherapy IMRT plans with PTV coverage of V98% ¿98%).ResultsCTV MRI was a mean of 18.6% larger than CTV RTOG: CTV MRI mean 138 cc (range 72.3 - 222.2 cc), CTV RTOG mean 116.3 cc (range 62.1 - 176.6 cc), (p¿<¿0.0001). The difference in mean PTV was only 4.6%: PTV MRI mean 386.9 cc (range 254.4 ¿ 551.2), PTV RTOG mean 370 cc (range 232.3 - 501.6) (p¿=¿0.05). The mean Jaccard Index representing intersection volume between CTVs was 0.72 and 0.84 for PTVs. Both criteria had a similar ability to meet rectal and bladder constraints. Rectal DVH: 77% of CTV RTOG cases passed all RADICALS criteria and 37% all QUANTEC criteria; versus 73% and 40% for CTV MRI (p¿=¿1.0 for both). Bladder DVH; 47% of CTV RTOG cases passed all RADICALS criteria and 67% all QUANTEC criteria, versus 57% and 60% for CTV MRI (p¿=¿0.61for RADICALS, p¿=¿0.79 for QUANTEC). CTV MRI spares more of the lower anterior bladder wall than CTV RTOG but increases coverage of the superior lateral bladder walls.ConclusionCTV contours based upon the patient¿s co-registered pre-operative MRI in the post-prostatectomy setting may improve coverage of the individual¿s prostate bed without substantially increasing the PTV size or dose to bladder/ rectum compared to RTOG CTV guidelines. Further evaluation of whether the use of pre-operative MRI improves local control rates is warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 %
Sweden 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 34 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 19%
Student > Master 5 14%
Other 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 47%
Physics and Astronomy 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 31%
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 24 December 2014.
All research outputs
#17,735,364
of 22,775,504 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,272
of 2,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,617
of 352,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#45
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,775,504 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 2,050 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 352,836 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.