↓ Skip to main content

Gaps between Evidence and Practice in Postoperative Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Focus on Toxicities and the Effects on Health-Related Quality of Life

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Gaps between Evidence and Practice in Postoperative Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Focus on Toxicities and the Effects on Health-Related Quality of Life
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2016.00070
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hamid Raziee, Alejandro Berlin

Abstract

Adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) after prostatectomy for patients with high-risk features [extracapsular extension (ECE), seminal vesicle invasion (SVI), and positive margin] has been shown to be associated with improved biochemical disease-free survival in three large randomized trials and with improved overall survival in one. Similarly, salvage radiotherapy (SRT) can effectively achieve biochemical control in a significant proportion of patients with a rising PSA after surgery. Nonetheless, both approaches of postoperative RT remain highly underutilized. This might be partly due to concerns with overtreatment inherent to adjuvant approaches, and/or hesitance about causing radiation toxicities and their subsequent effects on the patient's quality of life. Herein, we review the literature lending evidence to these arguments. We show recent series of ART/SRT and their low rates of acute and long-term toxicities, translating only in transient decline in quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes. We conclude that concerns with side effects should not preclude the recommendation of an effective and curative-intent therapy for men with prostate cancer initially treated with radical surgery.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 7 27%
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 3 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Psychology 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Materials Science 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 7 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 April 2016.
All research outputs
#17,156,647
of 25,990,981 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#6,814
of 22,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,866
of 316,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#41
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,990,981 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,858 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 316,063 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.