↓ Skip to main content

Dosimetric Impact of a Tumor Treating Fields Device for Glioblastoma Patients Undergoing Simultaneous Radiation Therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, March 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 (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Dosimetric Impact of a Tumor Treating Fields Device for Glioblastoma Patients Undergoing Simultaneous Radiation Therapy
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2018.00051
Pubmed ID
Authors

Taoran Li, Gaurav Shukla, Cheng Peng, Virginia Lockamy, Haisong Liu, Wenyin Shi

Abstract

A recent randomized phase III clinical trial in patients with glioblastoma demonstrated the efficacy of tumor treating fields (TTFields), in which alternating electric fields are applied via transducer arrays to a patient's scalp. This treatment, when added to standard of care therapy, was shown to increase overall survival from 16 to 20.9 months. These results have generated significant interest in incorporating the use of TTFields during postoperative concurrent chemoradiation. However, the dosimetric impact of high-density electrodes on the scalp, within the radiation field, is unknown. The dosimetric impact of TTFields electrodes in the radiation field was quantified in two ways: (1) dose calculated in a treatment planning system and (2) physical measurements of surface and deep doses. In the dose calculation comparison, a volumetric-modulated-arc-therapy (VMAT) radiation plan was developed on a CT scan without electrodes and then recalculated with electrodes. For physical measurements, the surface dose underneath TTFields electrodes were measured using a parallel plate ionization chamber and compared to measurements without electrodes for various incident beam angles and for 12 VMAT arc deliveries. Deep dose measurements were conducted for five VMAT plans using Scandidos Delta4 diode array: measured doses on two orthogonal diode arrays were compared. In the treatment planning system, the presence of the TTFields device caused mean reduction of PTV dose of 0.5-1%, and a mean increase in scalp dose of 0.5-1 Gy. Physical measurement showed increases of surface dose directly underneath by 30-110% for open fields with varying beam angles and by 70-160% for VMAT deliveries. Deep dose measurement by diode array showed dose decrease of 1-2% in most areas shadowed by the electrodes (max decrease 2.54%). The skin dose in patients being treating with cranial irradiation for glioblastoma may increase substantially (130-260%) with the addition of concurrent TTFields electrodes on the scalp. However, the impact of dose attenuation by the electrodes on deep dose during VMAT treatment is of much smaller, but measureable, magnitude (1-2%). Clinical trials exploring concurrent TTFields with cranial irradiation for glioblastoma may utilize scalp-sparing techniques to mitigate any potential increase in skin toxicity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Researcher 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 29%
Engineering 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Materials Science 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 15 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 17 October 2018.
All research outputs
#5,071,767
of 26,414,132 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#1,809
of 23,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,091
of 356,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#23
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,414,132 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,127 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 356,018 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 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.