↓ Skip to main content

Stereotactic Radiosurgery in the Management of Patients With Brain Metastases of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Indications, Decision Tools and Future Directions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
Stereotactic Radiosurgery in the Management of Patients With Brain Metastases of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Indications, Decision Tools and Future Directions
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2018.00154
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dianne Hartgerink, Britt van der Heijden, Dirk De Ruysscher, Alida Postma, Linda Ackermans, Ann Hoeben, Monique Anten, Philippe Lambin, Karin Terhaag, Arthur Jochems, Andre Dekker, Janna Schoenmaekers, Lizza Hendriks, Jaap Zindler

Abstract

Brain metastases (BM) frequently occur in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Most patients with BM have a limited life expectancy, measured in months. Selected patients may experience a very long progression-free survival, for example, patients with a targetable driver mutation. Traditionally, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) has been the cornerstone of the treatment, but its indication is a matter of debate. A randomized trial has shown that for patients with a poor prognosis, WBRT does not add quality of life (QoL) nor survival over the best supportive care. In recent decades, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has become an attractive non-invasive treatment for patients with BM. Only the BM is irradiated to an ablative dose, sparing healthy brain tissue. Intracranial recurrence rates decrease when WBRT is administered following SRS or resection but does not improve overall survival and comes at the expense of neurocognitive function and QoL. The downside of SRS compared with WBRT is a risk of radionecrosis (RN) and a higher risk of developing new BM during follow-up. Currently, SRS is an established treatment for patients with a maximum of four BM. Several promising strategies are currently being investigated to further improve the indication and outcome of SRS for patients with BM: the effectivity and safety of SRS in patients with more than four BM, combining SRS with systemic therapy such as targeted agents or immunotherapy, shared decision-making with SRS as a treatment option, and individualized isotoxic dose prescription to mitigate the risk of RN and further enhance local control probability of SRS. This review discusses the current indications of SRS and future directions of treatment for patients with BM of NSCLC with focus on the value of SRS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Other 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 32 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 43 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 06 June 2018.
All research outputs
#4,200,778
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#1,403
of 22,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,569
of 341,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#29
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,741 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
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 341,582 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.