| Title |
Altered fractionation radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in the treatment of head and neck cancer: a network meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s172018 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yingyu Liu, Changgui Kou, Wei Bai, Xinyu Liu, Yan Song, Lili Zhang, Mohan Wang, Yangyu Zhang, Yueyue You, Yue Yin, Xin Jiang, Ying Xin |
| Abstract |
A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted in patients with head and neck cancers (HNCs) to estimate the efficacy and safety of treatment with conventional fractionation radiotherapy (CF), conventional fractionation chemoradiotherapy (CF_CRT), hyperfractionated radiotherapy (HF), hyperfractionated chemoradiotherapy (HF_CRT), accelerated fractionation radiotherapy, accelerated fractionation chemoradiotherapy, accelerated hyperfractionated radiotherapy (HART) or accelerated hyperfractionated chemoradiotherapy (HACRT) to identify superior treatments to aid in clinical decisions. PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for potentially eligible randomized controlled trials up to December 2016. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and locoregional control (LRC) were considered efficacy outcomes, whereas acute toxicity and late toxicity on skin and mucosa were considered safety outcomes. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to rank each treatment in each index. Data from 72 trials with 21,868 participants were included in the analysis. Concerning OS, all treatments were associated with a significant advantage compared to CF alone, with HR effect sizes ranging from 0.64 to 0.83, and HACRT was significantly more effective than all the other treatments. The network comparisons of both HACRT vs HART and HF_CRT vs HF demonstrated a higher OS benefit, with an HR of 0.78 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.64-0.95) and 0.78 (95% CrI: 0.61-0.99), respectively. The results of SUCRA indicated that HACRT had the best ranking for OS and LRC, HF_CRT for DFS, HART for acute and late skin toxicity, CF_CRT for acute mucosal toxicity and HF_CRT for late mucosal toxicity. The NMA results support the notion that HACRT is the preferable treatment modality for HNCs because it has better rankings in all three efficacy indexes, although it does present a high risk of acute mucosal toxicity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 21% |
| Other | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 21% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 58% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 11% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
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 06 September 2018.
All research outputs
#16,728,456
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#984
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,802
of 345,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#62
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 345,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 147 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 53% of its contemporaries.