↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

1-, 3-, and 5-year survival among early-stage lung cancer patients treated with lobectomy vs SBRT

Overview of attention for article published in Lung Cancer: Targets and Therapy, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
1-, 3-, and 5-year survival among early-stage lung cancer patients treated with lobectomy vs SBRT
Published in
Lung Cancer: Targets and Therapy, August 2018
DOI 10.2147/lctt.s166320
Pubmed ID
Authors

Denise Albano, Thomas Bilfinger, Barbara Nemesure

Abstract

Lobectomy has traditionally been recommended for fit patients diagnosed with early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Recently, however, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has been introduced as an alternative treatment option. The purpose of this investigation is to compare survival outcomes for individuals with stage I/II NSCLC treated with lobectomy vs SBRT. This retrospective study included 191 patients (100 surgery, 91 SBRT) identified through the Lung Cancer Evaluation Center, Stony Brook, NY, between 2008 and 2012. Survival and recurrence rates were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazard models to adjust for possible confounders. A subset of cases was propensity-matched to address potential differences in health status between groups. 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival outcomes were significantly better among patients undergoing lobectomy vs SBRT. Survival rates at 3 years were 92.8% and 59.0% (p<0.001) in the 2 groups, respectively. Propensity-matched analyses indicated similar findings. Recurrence rates were likewise lower among patients undergoing surgery (7.1% vs 21.0%, p<0.01 at 3 years); however, statistical significance was not maintained in the propensity-matched analysis. These findings add to a growing evidence base supporting the use of lobectomy vs SBRT in the treatment of lung cancer among healthy, early-stage NSCLC patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Researcher 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 15 54%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Materials Science 1 4%
Unknown 17 61%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 November 2018.
All research outputs
#1,643,245
of 18,838,632 outputs
Outputs from Lung Cancer: Targets and Therapy
#5
of 99 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,309
of 288,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lung Cancer: Targets and Therapy
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,838,632 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 288,826 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them