These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12175561)

  • 1. Margins for geometric uncertainty around organs at risk in radiotherapy.
    McKenzie A; van Herk M; Mijnheer B
    Radiother Oncol; 2002 Mar; 62(3):299-307. PubMed ID: 12175561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The width of margins in radiotherapy treatment plans.
    McKenzie AL; van Herk M; Mijnheer B
    Phys Med Biol; 2000 Nov; 45(11):3331-42. PubMed ID: 11098907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Limitations of the planning organ at risk volume (PRV) concept.
    Stroom JC; Heijmen BJ
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2006 Sep; 66(1):279-86. PubMed ID: 16904527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Coverage optimized planning: probabilistic treatment planning based on dose coverage histogram criteria.
    Gordon JJ; Sayah N; Weiss E; Siebers JV
    Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):550-63. PubMed ID: 20229863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Loss of local control due to tumor displacement as a function of margin size, dose-response slope, and number of fractions.
    Selvaraj J; Uzan J; Baker C; Nahum A
    Med Phys; 2013 Apr; 40(4):041715. PubMed ID: 23556885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Experimental validation of the van Herk margin formula for lung radiation therapy.
    Ecclestone G; Bissonnette JP; Heath E
    Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):111721. PubMed ID: 24320429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A numerical simulation of organ motion and daily setup uncertainties: implications for radiation therapy.
    Killoran JH; Kooy HM; Gladstone DJ; Welte FJ; Beard CJ
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1997 Jan; 37(1):213-21. PubMed ID: 9054898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Inclusion of geometrical uncertainties in radiotherapy treatment planning by means of coverage probability.
    Stroom JC; de Boer HC; Huizenga H; Visser AG
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1999 Mar; 43(4):905-19. PubMed ID: 10098447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Image-guided radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer patients: geometrical uncertainty of the heart.
    Topolnjak R; Borst GR; Nijkamp J; Sonke JJ
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2012 Mar; 82(4):e647-55. PubMed ID: 22270162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Convolution method and CTV-to-PTV margins for finite fractions and small systematic errors.
    Gordon JJ; Siebers JV
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Apr; 52(7):1967-90. PubMed ID: 17374922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Analysis of interfractional set-up errors and intrafractional organ motions during IMRT for head and neck tumors to define an appropriate planning target volume (PTV)- and planning organs at risk volume (PRV)-margins.
    Suzuki M; Nishimura Y; Nakamatsu K; Okumura M; Hashiba H; Koike R; Kanamori S; Shibata T
    Radiother Oncol; 2006 Mar; 78(3):283-90. PubMed ID: 16564594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. On the use of margins for geometrical uncertainties around the rectum in radiotherapy planning.
    Muren LP; Ekerold R; Kvinnsland Y; Karlsdottir A; Dahl O
    Radiother Oncol; 2004 Jan; 70(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 15036847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Adequate margins for random setup uncertainties in head-and-neck IMRT.
    Astreinidou E; Bel A; Raaijmakers CP; Terhaard CH; Lagendijk JJ
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Mar; 61(3):938-44. PubMed ID: 15708278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Testing the new ICRU 62 'Planning Organ at Risk Volume' concept for the rectum.
    Muren LP; Karlsdottir A; Kvinnsland Y; Wentzel-Larsen T; Dahl O
    Radiother Oncol; 2005 Jun; 75(3):293-302. PubMed ID: 15878630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Inclusion of geometric uncertainties in treatment plan evaluation.
    van Herk M; Remeijer P; Lebesque JV
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2002 Apr; 52(5):1407-22. PubMed ID: 11955756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A study on planning organ at risk volume for the rectum using cone beam computed tomography in the treatment of prostate cancer.
    Prabhakar R; Oates R; Jones D; Kron T; Cramb J; Foroudi F; Geso M; Gill S
    Med Dosim; 2014; 39(1):38-43. PubMed ID: 24412028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A new method of incorporating systematic uncertainties in intensity-modulated radiotherapy optimization.
    Yang J; Mageras GS; Spirou SV; Jackson A; Yorke E; Ling CC; Chui CS
    Med Phys; 2005 Aug; 32(8):2567-79. PubMed ID: 16193787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Impact of geometric uncertainties on evaluation of treatment techniques for prostate cancer.
    Craig T; Wong E; Bauman G; Battista J; Van Dyk J
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Jun; 62(2):426-36. PubMed ID: 15890584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The use of spatial dose gradients and probability density function to evaluate the effect of internal organ motion for prostate IMRT treatment planning.
    Jiang R; Barnett RB; Chow JC; Chen JZ
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Mar; 52(5):1469-84. PubMed ID: 17301465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Three-dimensional dosimetric evaluation of a conventional radiotherapy technique for treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
    Chau RM; Teo PM; Choi PH; Cheung KY; Lee WY
    Radiother Oncol; 2001 Feb; 58(2):143-53. PubMed ID: 11166865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.