| Title |
Skin toxicities associated with tumor treating fields: case based review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuro-Oncology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11060-017-2612-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rimas V. Lukas, Kelley L. Ratermann, Eric T. Wong, John L. Villano |
| Abstract |
The novel anti-mitotic based tumor treating fields (TTFields) is FDA approved for recurrent glioblastoma. Recently the phase III upfront trial combining the Novo TTF-100A device, called Optune, with temozolomide following concurrent radiation therapy and chemotherapy, demonstrated improvement in survival. Wider use of this novel therapy is expected. The most common adverse event is dermatologic, which dominates compared to the next most frequently observed adverse event of headaches, the incidence of which was even in both arms in the phase III registration trial for recurrent glioblastoma. Our case review outlines the presentation, treatment, and outcome of representative patients using TTFields. In summary, preventative strategies to inform and educate patients and operators can prevent many of these dermatological events. Skin toxicity in the setting of concurrent use of TTFields with other therapies such as bevacizumab is an unknown and will need to be closely followed. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 16% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 31% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 20 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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
#6,333,293
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#783
of 2,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,749
of 316,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuro-Oncology
#8
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,982 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 316,171 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.