185 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20346644)
1. On comparing the quality of head and neck IMRT plans delivered with two different linear accelerator manufacturers.
Basran PS; Balogh J; Poon I; MacKenzie R; Chan T
Med Dosim; 2011; 36(1):75-80. PubMed ID: 20346644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical evaluation of direct aperture optimization when applied to head-and-neck IMRT.
Jones S; Williams M
Med Dosim; 2008; 33(1):86-92. PubMed ID: 18262129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Treatment plan comparison between helical tomotherapy and MLC-based IMRT using radiobiological measures.
Mavroidis P; Ferreira BC; Shi C; Lind BK; Papanikolaou N
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Jul; 52(13):3817-36. PubMed ID: 17664579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Dosimetric comparison of helical tomotherapy and linac-IMRT treatment plans for head and neck cancer patients.
Zhang X; Penagaricano J; Moros EG; Corry PM; Yan Y; Ratanatharathorn V
Med Dosim; 2010; 35(4):264-8. PubMed ID: 19944587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Significant improvement in normal tissue sparing and target coverage for head and neck cancer by means of helical tomotherapy.
Fiorino C; Dell'Oca I; Pierelli A; Broggi S; De Martin E; Di Muzio N; Longobardi B; Fazio F; Calandrino R
Radiother Oncol; 2006 Mar; 78(3):276-82. PubMed ID: 16546279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The importance of accurate linear accelerator head modelling for IMRT Monte Carlo calculations.
Reynaert N; Coghe M; De Smedt B; Paelinck L; Vanderstraeten B; De Gersem W; Van Duyse B; De Wagter C; De Neve W; Thierens H
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Mar; 50(5):831-46. PubMed ID: 15798258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A feasibility study of using conventional jaws to deliver complex IMRT plans for head and neck cancer.
Mu G; Xia P
Phys Med Biol; 2009 Sep; 54(18):5613-23. PubMed ID: 19724096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Re-planning for compensator-based IMRT with original compensators.
Zhang G; Feygelman V; Stevens C; Li W; Leuthold S; Springett G; Hoffe S
Med Dosim; 2011; 36(1):102-8. PubMed ID: 20207532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Dosimetric comparison of split field and fixed jaw techniques for large IMRT target volumes in the head and neck.
Srivastava SP; Das IJ; Kumar A; Johnstone PA
Med Dosim; 2011; 36(1):6-9. PubMed ID: 19944592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Experimental determination of peripheral doses for different IMRT techniques delivered by a Siemens linear accelerator.
Wiezorek T; Voigt A; Metzger N; Georg D; Schwedas M; Salz H; Wendt TG
Strahlenther Onkol; 2008 Feb; 184(2):73-9. PubMed ID: 18259698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Head-and-neck IMRT treatments assessed with a Monte Carlo dose calculation engine.
Seco J; Adams E; Bidmead M; Partridge M; Verhaegen F
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Mar; 50(5):817-30. PubMed ID: 15798257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Monte Carlo simulation of the photon beam characteristics from medical linear accelerators.
Kim HK; Han SJ; Kim JL; Kim BH; Chang SY; Lee JK
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2006; 119(1-4):510-3. PubMed ID: 16644954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Dosimetric discrepancies caused by differing MLC parameters for dynamic IMRT.
Wasbø E; Valen H
Phys Med Biol; 2008 Jan; 53(2):405-15. PubMed ID: 18184995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of linac based fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy and tomotherapy treatment plans for skull-base tumors.
Soisson ET; Tomé WA; Richards GM; Mehta MP
Radiother Oncol; 2006 Mar; 78(3):313-21. PubMed ID: 16490269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Automatic online adaptive radiation therapy techniques for targets with significant shape change: a feasibility study.
Court LE; Tishler RB; Petit J; Cormack R; Chin L
Phys Med Biol; 2006 May; 51(10):2493-501. PubMed ID: 16675865
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparing 3DCRT and inversely optimized IMRT planning for head and neck cancer: equivalence between step-and-shoot and sliding window techniques.
Longobardi B; De Martin E; Fiorino C; Dell'oca I; Broggi S; Cattaneo GM; Calandrino R
Radiother Oncol; 2005 Nov; 77(2):148-56. PubMed ID: 16260056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Impacts of multileaf collimators leaf width on intensity-modulated radiotherapy planning for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: analysis of two commercial elekta devices.
Wang S; Gong Y; Xu Q; Bai S; Lu Y; Jiang Q; Chen N
Med Dosim; 2011; 36(2):153-9. PubMed ID: 20488691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Influence of the linac design on intensity-modulated radiotherapy of head-and-neck plans.
Topolnjak R; van der Heide UA; Meijer GJ; van Asselen B; Raaijmakers CP; Lagendijk JJ
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Jan; 52(1):169-82. PubMed ID: 17183134
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A feasibility study of using conventional jaws to deliver IMRT plans in the treatment of prostate cancer.
Kim Y; Verhey LJ; Xia P
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Apr; 52(8):2147-56. PubMed ID: 17404460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Single Arc Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy of head and neck cancer.
Bertelsen A; Hansen CR; Johansen J; Brink C
Radiother Oncol; 2010 May; 95(2):142-8. PubMed ID: 20188427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
