↓ Skip to main content

Clinical results of conformal versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy using a focal simultaneous boost for muscle-invasive bladder cancer in elderly or medically unfit patients

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Clinical results of conformal versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy using a focal simultaneous boost for muscle-invasive bladder cancer in elderly or medically unfit patients
Published in
Radiation Oncology, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13014-016-0618-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lotte J. Lutkenhaus, Rob M. van Os, Arjan Bel, Maarten C. C. M. Hulshof

Abstract

For elderly or medically unfit patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer, cystectomy or chemotherapy are contraindicated. This leaves radical radiotherapy as the only treatment option. It was the aim of this study to retrospectively analyze the treatment outcome and associated toxicity of conformal versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using a focal simultaneous tumor boost for muscle-invasive bladder cancer in patients not suitable for cystectomy. One hundred eighteen patients with T2-4 N0-1 M0 bladder cancer were analyzed retrospectively. Median age was 80 years. Treatment consisted of either a conformal box technique or IMRT and included a simultaneous boost to the tumor. To enable an accurate boost delivery, fiducial markers were placed around the tumor. Patients were treated with 40 Gy in 20 fractions to the elective treatment volumes, and a daily tumor boost up to 55-60 Gy. Clinical complete response was seen in 87 % of patients. Three-year overall survival was 44 %, with a locoregional control rate of 73 % at 3 years. Toxicity was low, with late urinary and intestinal toxicity rates grade ≥ 2 of 14 and 5 %, respectively. The use of IMRT reduced late intestinal toxicity, whereas fiducial markers reduced acute urinary toxicity. Radical radiotherapy using a focal boost is feasible and effective for elderly or unfit patients, with a 3-year locoregional control of 73 %. Toxicity rates were low, and were reduced by the use of IMRT and fiducial markers.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 20%
Student > Master 7 20%
Other 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 46%
Physics and Astronomy 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 6%
Philosophy 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 8 23%
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 20 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,315,221
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Radiation Oncology
#1,679
of 2,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,557
of 300,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Radiation Oncology
#49
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,059 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 300,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.