↓ Skip to main content

Use of a Flexible Inflatable Multi-Channel Applicator for Vaginal Brachytherapy in the Management of Gynecologic Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
8 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
Use of a Flexible Inflatable Multi-Channel Applicator for Vaginal Brachytherapy in the Management of Gynecologic Cancer
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2015.00201
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel M. Shin, Tamara L. Duckworth, Benjamin T. Cooper, John P. Curtin, Peter B. Schiff, J. Keith DeWyngaert, Stella C. Lymberis

Abstract

Evaluate use of novel multi-channel applicator (MC) Capri™ to improve vaginal disease coverage achievable by single-channel applicator (SC) and comparable to Syed plan simulation. Twenty-eight plans were evaluated from four patients with primary or recurrent gynecologic cancer in the vagina. Each received whole pelvis radiation, followed by three weekly treatments using HDR brachytherapy with a 13-channel MC. Upper vagina was treated to 5 mm depth to 1500 cGy/3 fractions with a simultaneous integrated boost totaling 2100 cGy/3 fractions to tumor. Modeling of SC and Syed plans was performed using MC scans for each patient. Dosimetry for MC and SC plans was evaluated for PTV700 cGy coverage, maximum dose to 2 cm(3) to bladder, rectum, as well as mucosal surface points. Dosimetry for Syed plans was calculated for PTV700 cGy coverage. Patients were followed for treatment response and toxicity. Dosimetric analysis between MC and SC plans demonstrated increased tumor coverage (PTV700 cGy), with decreased rectal, bladder, and contralateral vaginal mucosa dose in favor of MC. These differences were significant (p < 0.05). Comparison of MC and Syed plans demonstrated increased tumor coverage in favor of Syed plans which were not significant (p = 0.71). Patients treated with MC had no cancer recurrence or ≥grade 3 toxicity. Use of MC was efficacious and safe, providing superior coverage of tumor volumes ≤1 cm depth compared to SC and comparable to Syed implant. MC avoids excess dose to surrounding organs compared to SC, and potentially less morbidity than Syed implants. For tumors extending ≤1 cm depth, use of MC represents an alternative to an interstitial implant.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 38%
Student > Master 2 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Professor 1 13%
Unknown 1 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 38%
Physics and Astronomy 2 25%
Materials Science 1 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 13%
Unknown 1 13%
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 14 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,309
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,679
of 280,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#50
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 280,717 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.