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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Volume Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) for pulmonary Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with lesions in close approximation to the chest wall
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2013.00012 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Ding, Yuan-Chyuan Lo, Sidney Kadish, David Goff, Richard S. Pieters, Geoffrey Graeber, Karl Uy, Syed Quadri, Richard Moser, Kevin Martin, John Day, Thomas J. FitzGerald |
| Abstract |
Purpose: Chest wall pain and discomfort has been recognized as a significant late effect of radiation therapy in historical and modern treatment models. Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) is becoming an important treatment tool in oncology care for patients with intrathoracic lesions. For lesions in close approximation to the chest wall with motion management, SBRT techniques can deliver high dose to the chest wall. As an unintended target of consequence, there is possibility of imposing significant chest wall pain and discomfort as a late effect of therapy. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the potential role of Volume Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) technologies in decreasing chest wall dose in SBRT treatment of pulmonary lesions in close approximation to the chest wall.Materials and Methods: Ten patients with pulmonary lesions of various sizes and tomography in close approximation to the chest wall were selected for retrospective review. All volumes including tumor target, chest wall, ribs, and lung were contoured with maximal intensity projection maps and four-dimensional computer tomography planning. Radiation therapy planning consisted of static techniques including Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy compared to VMAT therapy to a dose of 60 Gy in 12 Gy fraction dose. Dose volume histogram to rib, chest wall, and lung were compared between plans with statistical analysis.Results: In all patients, dose and volume were improved to ribs and chest wall using VMAT technologies compared to static field techniques. On average, volume receiving 30 Gy to the chest wall was improved by 74%; the ribs by 60%. In only one patient did the VMAT treatment technique increase pulmonary volume receiving 20 Gy (V20).Conclusions: VMAT technology has potential of limiting radiation dose to sensitive chest wall regions in patients with lesions in close approximation to this structure. This would also have potential value to lesions treated with SBRT in other body regions where targets abut critical structures. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 24% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 49% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 10 | 27% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
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 22 February 2013.
All research outputs
#22,834,739
of 25,460,914 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#16,026
of 22,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,843
of 289,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#193
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,460,914 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 22,544 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. 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 289,411 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 328 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.