↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

When to perform positron emission tomography/computed tomography or radionuclide bone scan in patients with recently diagnosed prostate cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Management and Research, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
When to perform positron emission tomography/computed tomography or radionuclide bone scan in patients with recently diagnosed prostate cancer
Published in
Cancer Management and Research, June 2013
DOI 10.2147/cmar.s34685
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carmelo Caldarella, Giorgio Treglia, Alessandro Giordano, Luca Giovanella

Abstract

Skeletal metastases are very common in prostate cancer and represent the main metastatic site in about 80% of prostate cancer patients, with a significant impact in patients' prognosis. Early detection of bone metastases is critical in the management of patients with recently diagnosed high-risk prostate cancer: radical treatment is recommended in case of localized disease; systemic therapy should be preferred in patients with distant secondary disease. Bone scintigraphy using radiolabeled bisphosphonates is of great importance in the management of these patients; however, its main drawback is its low overall accuracy, due to the nonspecific uptake in sites of increased bone turnover. Positron-emitting radiopharmaceuticals, such as fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose, choline-derived drugs (fluorine-18-fluorocholine and carbon-11-choline) and sodium fluorine-18-fluoride, are increasingly used in clinical practice to detect metastatic spread, and particularly bone involvement, in patients with prostate cancer, to reinforce or substitute information provided by bone scan. Each radiopharmaceutical has a specific mechanism of uptake; therefore, diagnostic performances may differ from one radiopharmaceutical to another on the same lesions, as demonstrated in the literature, with variable sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy values in the same patients. Whether bone scintigraphy can be substituted by these new methods is a matter of debate. However, greater radiobiological burden, higher costs, and the necessity of an in-site cyclotron limit the use of these positron emission tomography methods as first-line investigations in patients with prostate cancer: bone scintigraphy remains the mainstay for the detection of bone metastases in current clinical practice.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 22%
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 5 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 13%
Psychology 1 4%
Chemistry 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 22%
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 04 August 2013.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Management and Research
#793
of 2,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,276
of 206,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Management and Research
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,074 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 206,477 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.