176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25186378)
1. Effects of minimum monitor unit threshold on spot scanning proton plan quality.
Howard M; Beltran C; Mayo CS; Herman MG
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091703. PubMed ID: 25186378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of two methods for minimizing the effect of delayed charge on the dose delivered with a synchrotron based discrete spot scanning proton beam.
Whitaker TJ; Beltran C; Tryggestad E; Bues M; Kruse JJ; Remmes NB; Tasson A; Herman MG
Med Phys; 2014 Aug; 41(8):081703. PubMed ID: 25086513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Implication of spot position error on plan quality and patient safety in pencil-beam-scanning proton therapy.
Yu J; Beltran CJ; Herman MG
Med Phys; 2014 Aug; 41(8):081706. PubMed ID: 25086516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinically Applicable Monte Carlo-based Biological Dose Optimization for the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancers With Spot-Scanning Proton Therapy.
Wan Chan Tseung HS; Ma J; Kreofsky CR; Ma DJ; Beltran C
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2016 Aug; 95(5):1535-1543. PubMed ID: 27325476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A GPU-accelerated and Monte Carlo-based intensity modulated proton therapy optimization system.
Ma J; Beltran C; Seum Wan Chan Tseung H; Herman MG
Med Phys; 2014 Dec; 41(12):121707. PubMed ID: 25471954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of spot parameters in pencil beam scanning treatment planning.
Kraan AC; Depauw N; Clasie B; Giunta M; Madden T; Kooy HM
Med Phys; 2018 Jan; 45(1):60-73. PubMed ID: 29148575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of organ-at-risk sparing and plan robustness for spot-scanning proton therapy and volumetric modulated arc photon therapy in head-and-neck cancer.
Barten DL; Tol JP; Dahele M; Slotman BJ; Verbakel WF
Med Phys; 2015 Nov; 42(11):6589-98. PubMed ID: 26520750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Intensity modulated proton therapy treatment planning using single-field optimization: the impact of monitor unit constraints on plan quality.
Zhu XR; Sahoo N; Zhang X; Robertson D; Li H; Choi S; Lee AK; Gillin MT
Med Phys; 2010 Mar; 37(3):1210-9. PubMed ID: 20384258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Technical Note: Plan-delivery-time constrained inverse optimization method with minimum-MU-per-energy-layer (MMPEL) for efficient pencil beam scanning proton therapy.
Gao H; Clasie B; McDonald M; Langen KM; Liu T; Lin Y
Med Phys; 2020 Sep; 47(9):3892-3897. PubMed ID: 32614472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Spot-scanning beam proton therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy for ipsilateral head and neck malignancies: a treatment planning comparison.
Kandula S; Zhu X; Garden AS; Gillin M; Rosenthal DI; Ang KK; Mohan R; Amin MV; Garcia JA; Wu R; Sahoo N; Frank SJ
Med Dosim; 2013; 38(4):390-4. PubMed ID: 23916884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Comparing proton treatment plans of pediatric brain tumors in two pencil beam scanning nozzles with different spot sizes.
Kralik JC; Xi L; Solberg TD; Simone CB; Lin L
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Nov; 16(6):41-50. PubMed ID: 26699553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of Spot Size and Beam-Shaping Devices on the Treatment Plan Quality for Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy.
Moteabbed M; Yock TI; Depauw N; Madden TM; Kooy HM; Paganetti H
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2016 May; 95(1):190-198. PubMed ID: 27084640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Benchmarking of a treatment planning system for spot scanning proton therapy: comparison and analysis of robustness to setup errors of photon IMRT and proton SFUD treatment plans of base of skull meningioma.
Harding R; Trnková P; Weston SJ; Lilley J; Thompson CM; Short SC; Loughrey C; Cosgrove VP; Lomax AJ; Thwaites DI
Med Phys; 2014 Nov; 41(11):111710. PubMed ID: 25370624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Treatment planning for radiotherapy with very high-energy electron beams and comparison of VHEE and VMAT plans.
Bazalova-Carter M; Qu B; Palma B; Hårdemark B; Hynning E; Jensen C; Maxim PG; Loo BW
Med Phys; 2015 May; 42(5):2615-25. PubMed ID: 25979053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Optimizing mini-ridge filter thickness to reduce proton treatment times in a spot-scanning synchrotron system.
Courneyea L; Beltran C; Tseung HS; Yu J; Herman MG
Med Phys; 2014 Jun; 41(6):061713. PubMed ID: 24877808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Fan-beam intensity modulated proton therapy.
Hill P; Westerly D; Mackie T
Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):111704. PubMed ID: 24320412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Incorporating deliverable monitor unit constraints into spot intensity optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy treatment planning.
Cao W; Lim G; Li X; Li Y; Zhu XR; Zhang X
Phys Med Biol; 2013 Aug; 58(15):5113-25. PubMed ID: 23835656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The effect of common dental fixtures on treatment planning and delivery for head and neck intensity modulated proton therapy.
Hu YH; Seum WCTH; Hunzeker A; Muller O; Foote RL; Mundy DW
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2023 Jul; 24(7):e13973. PubMed ID: 36972299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Is there a single spot size and grid for intensity modulated proton therapy? Simulation of head and neck, prostate and mesothelioma cases.
Widesott L; Lomax AJ; Schwarz M
Med Phys; 2012 Mar; 39(3):1298-308. PubMed ID: 22380362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
