BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20927224)

  • 1. Comparison of dosimetric characteristics of Siemens virtual and physical wedges for ONCOR linear accelerator.
    Attalla EM; Abo-Elenein HS; Ammar H; El-Desoky I
    J Med Phys; 2010 Jul; 35(3):164-9. PubMed ID: 20927224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of dosimetric characteristics of Siemens virtual and physical wedges.
    Zhu XR; Gillin MT; Jursinic PA; Lopez F; Grimm DF; Rownd JJ
    Med Phys; 2000 Oct; 27(10):2267-77. PubMed ID: 11099193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Variations in the Dose Profiles of Physical and Virtual Wedge Filters of ONCOR Linear Accelerator.
    Farrukh S; Ilyas N; Iqbal MJ; Ahmed M; Khan KM; Khan AM
    J Med Imaging Radiat Sci; 2015 Dec; 46(4):413-419. PubMed ID: 31052122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Surface and peripheral doses of dynamic and physical wedges.
    Li Z; Klein EE
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1997 Mar; 37(4):921-5. PubMed ID: 9128970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. SU-E-T-143: Effect of Physical and Virtual Wedges on the Surface Dose at Various SSD for 6 and 15 MV Photon Beam.
    Yadav G; Sinha SN; Ashokkumar S; Raman K; Mishra M; Thiyagarajan R; Yadav RS
    Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6Part11):3736. PubMed ID: 28517136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Commissioning Siemens Virtual Wedges in the Oncentra MasterPlan treatment planning system using Gafchromic EBT film.
    Ferretti A; Simonato F; Zandonà R; Reccanello S; Fabbris R
    Med Phys; 2010 Dec; 37(12):6310-6. PubMed ID: 21302787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of dosimetric characteristics of physical and enhanced dynamic wedges.
    Saminathan S; Manickam R; Supe SS
    Rep Pract Oncol Radiother; 2011; 17(1):4-12. PubMed ID: 24376991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Studying wedge factors and beam profiles for physical and enhanced dynamic wedges.
    Ahmad M; Hussain A; Muhammad W; Rizvi SQ; Matiullah
    J Med Phys; 2010 Jan; 35(1):33-41. PubMed ID: 20177568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Dependence of virtual wedge factor on dose calibration and monitor units.
    Zhu XR; Gillin MT; Ehlers K; Lopez F; Grimm DF; Rownd JJ; Steinberg TH
    Med Phys; 2001 Feb; 28(2):174-7. PubMed ID: 11243340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Dosimetric evaluation of the Siemens Virtual Wedge.
    van Santvoort J
    Phys Med Biol; 1998 Sep; 43(9):2651-63. PubMed ID: 9755952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Monte Carlo modelling of a virtual wedge.
    Verhaegen F; Das IJ
    Phys Med Biol; 1999 Dec; 44(12):N251-9. PubMed ID: 10616157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Multienergetic verification of dynamic wedge angles in medical accelerators using multichannel linear array.
    Kowalik A; Litoborski M
    Rep Pract Oncol Radiother; 2013; 18(4):220-34. PubMed ID: 24416557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dosimetry of large wedged high-energy photon beams.
    Podgorsak MB; Kubsad SS; Paliwal BR
    Med Phys; 1993; 20(2 Pt 1):369-73. PubMed ID: 8497224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Implementation and verification of virtual wedge in a three-dimensional radiotherapy planning system.
    Miften M; Zhu XR; Takahashi K; Lopez F; Gillin MT
    Med Phys; 2000 Jul; 27(7):1635-43. PubMed ID: 10947267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Beam-hardening effects of wedges on a spoiled 6 MV beam.
    Lee PC; Glasgow GP
    Med Dosim; 1994; 19(3):141-4. PubMed ID: 7818752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dynamic wedge versus physical wedge: a Monte Carlo study.
    Shih R; Li XA; Chu JC
    Med Phys; 2001 Apr; 28(4):612-9. PubMed ID: 11339759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Poster - Thur Eve - 60: Physical and dynamic wedges in radiotherapy for rectal cancer: A dosimetric comparison.
    Isa M; Iqbal K; Afzal M; Buzdar S; Chow J
    Med Phys; 2012 Jul; 39(7Part3):4636. PubMed ID: 28516699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. SU-E-T-151: Effect of Surface Dose and Depth of Maximum Dose with Physical Wedge Filters for 6MV Flattened and 7MV Unflattened Photon Beams.
    Ashokkumar S; Sinha SN; Yadav G; Raman K; Thiyagarajan R; Nambiraj NA
    Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6Part12):3737-3738. PubMed ID: 28517808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Dosimetric characteristics of wedges mounted beyond the blocking tray.
    Ochran TG; Boyer AL; Nyerick CE; Otte VA
    Med Phys; 1992; 19(1):187-94. PubMed ID: 1620046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessment of computerized treatment planning system accuracy in calculating wedge factors of physical wedged fields for 6 MV photon beams.
    Muhammad W; Maqbool M; Shahid M; Hussain A; Tahir S; Matiullah ; Rooh G; Ahmad T; Lee SH
    Phys Med; 2011 Jul; 27(3):135-43. PubMed ID: 20655782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.