183 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23718583)
1. A study of IMRT planning parameters on planning efficiency, delivery efficiency, and plan quality.
Mittauer K; Lu B; Yan G; Kahler D; Gopal A; Amdur R; Liu C
Med Phys; 2013 Jun; 40(6):061704. PubMed ID: 23718583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. SU-E-T-621: Comprehensive Study of Head and Neck IMRT Parameters on Planning and Delivery Efficiency, Plan Quality, and Dose Accuracy.
Mittauer K; Lu B; Liu C; Yan G; Gopal A
Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6Part20):3849. PubMed ID: 28517495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. IMRT planning parameter optimization for spine stereotactic radiosurgery.
Ayala GB; Doan KA; Ko HJ; Park PK; Santiago ED; Kuruvila SJ; Ghia AJ; Briere TM; Wen Z
Med Dosim; 2019 Winter; 44(4):303-308. PubMed ID: 30514600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The potential for sparing of parotids and escalation of biologically effective dose with intensity-modulated radiation treatments of head and neck cancers: a treatment design study.
Wu Q; Manning M; Schmidt-Ullrich R; Mohan R
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2000 Jan; 46(1):195-205. PubMed ID: 10656393
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of anatomy-based, fluence-based and aperture-based treatment planning approaches for VMAT.
Rao M; Cao D; Chen F; Ye J; Mehta V; Wong T; Shepard D
Phys Med Biol; 2010 Nov; 55(21):6475-90. PubMed ID: 20959688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A new metric for assessing IMRT modulation complexity and plan deliverability.
McNiven AL; Sharpe MB; Purdie TG
Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):505-15. PubMed ID: 20229859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A study of different minimum segment area parameters on automatic IMRT plans for cervical cancer using Pinnacle3 9.10 TPS.
Sun H; Wang N; Wang X; Huang G; Chang Y; Liu Y
Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Sep; 101(36):e29290. PubMed ID: 36086767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Commissioning and quality assurance of a commercial stereotactic treatment-planning system for extracranial IMRT.
Wang L; Li J; Paskalev K; Hoban P; Luo W; Chen L; McNeeley S; Price R; Ma C
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2006; 7(1):21-34. PubMed ID: 16518314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Investigation of optimum minimum segment width on VMAT plan quality and deliverability: A comprehensive dosimetric and clinical evaluation using DVH analysis.
Yoosuf AM; Ahmad MB; AlShehri S; Alhadab A; Alqathami M
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2021 Nov; 22(11):29-40. PubMed ID: 34592787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Improving IMRT delivery efficiency using intensity limits during inverse planning.
Coselmon MM; Moran JM; Radawski JD; Fraass BA
Med Phys; 2005 May; 32(5):1234-45. PubMed ID: 15984674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Planning quality and delivery efficiency of sMLC delivered IMRT treatment of oropharyngeal cancers evaluated by RTOG H-0022 dosimetric criteria.
Zhu XR; Schultz CJ; Gillin MT
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2004; 5(4):80-95. PubMed ID: 15738923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Impact of dose calculation accuracy during optimization on lung IMRT plan quality.
Li Y; Rodrigues A; Li T; Yuan L; Yin FF; Wu QJ
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Jan; 16(1):5137. PubMed ID: 25679172
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Technical and dosimetric considerations in IMRT treatment planning for large target volumes.
Malhotra HK; Raina S; Avadhani JS; deBoer S; Podgorsak MB
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2005; 6(4):77-87. PubMed ID: 16421502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. SU-E-T-601: Dosimetric Evaluation of the Parameter Variation with Varying Calculation Grid Size in the IMRT Cases.
Markovic M; Stathakis S; Mavroidis P; Gutierrez A; Esquivel C; Papanikolau N
Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6Part19):3844. PubMed ID: 28517093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of patient setup errors on simultaneously integrated boost head and neck IMRT treatment plans.
Siebers JV; Keall PJ; Wu Q; Williamson JF; Schmidt-Ullrich RK
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Oct; 63(2):422-33. PubMed ID: 16168835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Pretreatment patient-specific IMRT quality assurance: a correlation study between gamma index and patient clinical dose volume histogram.
Stasi M; Bresciani S; Miranti A; Maggio A; Sapino V; Gabriele P
Med Phys; 2012 Dec; 39(12):7626-34. PubMed ID: 23231310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Biological consequences of MLC calibration errors in IMRT delivery and QA.
Moiseenko V; Lapointe V; James K; Yin L; Liu M; Pawlicki T
Med Phys; 2012 Apr; 39(4):1917-24. PubMed ID: 22482613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The impact of direct aperture optimization on plan quality and efficiency in complex head and neck IMRT.
Sabatino M; Kretschmer M; Zink K; Würschmidt F
Radiat Oncol; 2012 Jan; 7():7. PubMed ID: 22269088
[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]
