172 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21452739)
1. Sensitivity of postplanning target and OAR coverage estimates to dosimetric margin distribution sampling parameters.
Xu H; Gordon JJ; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2011 Feb; 38(2):1018-27. PubMed ID: 21452739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of dosimetric margins in prostate IMRT treatment plans.
Gordon JJ; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2008 Feb; 35(2):569-75. PubMed ID: 18383678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Target miss using PTV-based IMRT compared to robust optimization via coverage probability concept in prostate cancer.
Outaggarts Z; Wegener D; Berger B; Zips D; Paulsen F; Bleif M; Thorwarth D; Alber M; Dohm O; Müller AC
Acta Oncol; 2020 Aug; 59(8):911-917. PubMed ID: 32436467
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparisons of treatment optimization directly incorporating random patient setup uncertainty with a margin-based approach.
Moore JA; Gordon JJ; Anscher MS; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2009 Sep; 36(9):3880-90. PubMed ID: 19810460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Dosimetric Evaluation of Incorporating Patient Geometric Variations Into Adaptive Plan Optimization Through Probabilistic Treatment Planning in Head and Neck Cancers.
Liu Q; Liang J; Zhou D; Krauss DJ; Chen PY; Yan D
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2018 Jul; 101(4):985-997. PubMed ID: 29976511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. PTV-based IMPT optimization incorporating planning risk volumes vs robust optimization.
Liu W; Frank SJ; Li X; Li Y; Zhu RX; Mohan R
Med Phys; 2013 Feb; 40(2):021709. PubMed ID: 23387732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Novel adaptive beam-dependent margins for additional OAR sparing.
Tsang HS; Kamerling CP; Ziegenhein P; Nill S; Oelfke U
Phys Med Biol; 2018 Oct; 63(21):215019. PubMed ID: 30372420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of OAR dose sparing and plan robustness of beam-specific PTV in lung cancer IMRT treatment.
Chang Y; Xiao F; Quan H; Yang Z
Radiat Oncol; 2020 Oct; 15(1):241. PubMed ID: 33069253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Coverage-based treatment planning: optimizing the IMRT PTV to meet a CTV coverage criterion.
Gordon JJ; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2009 Mar; 36(3):961-73. PubMed ID: 19378757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Comparisons of treatment optimization directly incorporating systematic patient setup uncertainty with a margin-based approach.
Moore JA; Gordon JJ; Anscher M; Silva J; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):1102-11. PubMed ID: 22320820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Coverage-based treatment planning to accommodate delineation uncertainties in prostate cancer treatment.
Xu H; Gordon JJ; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 42(9):5435-43. PubMed ID: 26328992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessment of Monte Carlo algorithm for compliance with RTOG 0915 dosimetric criteria in peripheral lung cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy.
Pokhrel D; Sood S; Badkul R; Jiang H; McClinton C; Lominska C; Kumar P; Wang F
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 May; 17(3):277-293. PubMed ID: 27167284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effectiveness of robust optimization against geometric uncertainties in TomoHelical planning for prostate cancer.
Yagihashi T; Inoue K; Nagata H; Yamanaka M; Yamano A; Suzuki S; Yamakabe W; Sato N; Omura M; Inoue T
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2023 Apr; 24(4):e13881. PubMed ID: 36576418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Single institution's dosimetry and IGRT analysis of prostate SBRT.
Wu QJ; Li T; Yuan L; Yin FF; Lee WR
Radiat Oncol; 2013 Sep; 8():215. PubMed ID: 24034234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The comparison of radiotherapy techniques for treatment of the prostate cancer: the three-field vs. the four-field.
Milecki P; Piotrowski T; Dymnicka M
Neoplasma; 2004; 51(1):64-9. PubMed ID: 15004663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Robust optimization in lung treatment plans accounting for geometric uncertainty.
Zhang X; Rong Y; Morrill S; Fang J; Narayanasamy G; Galhardo E; Maraboyina S; Croft C; Xia F; Penagaricano J
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 May; 19(3):19-26. PubMed ID: 29524301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of four consensus guidelines and dosimetric evaluation of 3D-CRT versus tomotherapy IMRT.
Malone S; Croke J; Roustan-Delatour N; Belanger E; Avruch L; Malone C; Morash C; Kayser C; Underhill K; Li Y; Malone K; Nyiri B; Spaans J
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2012 Nov; 84(3):725-32. PubMed ID: 22444999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Determination of action thresholds for electromagnetic tracking system-guided hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy using volumetric modulated arc therapy.
Zhang P; Mah D; Happersett L; Cox B; Hunt M; Mageras G
Med Phys; 2011 Jul; 38(7):4001-8. PubMed ID: 21858997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
