↓ Skip to main content

One- vs. Three-Fraction Pancreatic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Pancreatic Carcinoma: Single Institution Retrospective Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
One- vs. Three-Fraction Pancreatic Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Pancreatic Carcinoma: Single Institution Retrospective Review
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2017.00272
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip Anthony Sutera, Mark E. Bernard, Beant S. Gill, Kamran K. Harper, Kimmen Quan, Nathan Bahary, Steven A. Burton, Herbert Zeh, Dwight E. Heron

Abstract

Early reports of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) used single fraction, but eventually shifted to multifraction regimens. We conducted a single institution review of our patients treated with single- or multifraction SBRT to determine whether any outcome differences existed. Patients treated with SBRT in any setting for PDAC at our facility were included, from 2004 to 2014. Overall survival (OS), local control (LC), regional control (RC), distant metastasis (DM), and late grade 3 or greater radiation toxicities from the time of SBRT were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimation to either the date of last follow-up/death or local/regional/distant failure. We identified 289 patients (291 lesions) with pathologically confirmed PDAC. Median age was 69 (range, 33-90) years. Median gross tumor volume was 12.3 (8.6-21.3) cm3 and planning target volume 17.9 (12-27) cm3. Single fraction was used in 90 (30.9%) and multifraction in 201 (69.1%) lesions. At a median follow-up of 17.3 months (IQR 10.1-29.3 months), the median survival for the entire cohort 17.8 months with a 2-year OS of 35.3%. Univariate analysis showed multifraction schemes to have a higher 2-year OS 30.5% vs. 37.5% (p = 0.019), it did not hold significance on MVA. Multifractionation schemes were found to have a higher LC on MVA (HR = 0.53, 95% CI, 0.33-0.85, p = 0.009). At 2 years, late grade 3+ toxicity was 2.5%. Post-SBRT CA19-9 was found on MVA to be a prognostic factor for OS (HR = 1.01, 95% CI, 1.01-1.01, p = 0.009), RC (HR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.01, p = 0.02), and DM (HR = 1.01, 95% CI, 1.01-1.01, p = 0.001). Our single institution retrospective review is the largest to date comparing single and multifraction SBRT and the first to show multifraction regimen SBRT to have a higher LC than single fractionation. Additionally, we show low rates of severe late toxicity with SBRT.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 21%
Other 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Lecturer 2 11%
Professor 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 68%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Unknown 4 21%
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 21 November 2017.
All research outputs
#21,305,573
of 26,161,782 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,625
of 22,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,401
of 339,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#53
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,161,782 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 22,911 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 339,761 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.