94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25369148)
1. The effect of surgical titanium rods on proton therapy delivered for cervical bone tumors: experimental validation using an anthropomorphic phantom.
Dietlicher I; Casiraghi M; Ares C; Bolsi A; Weber DC; Lomax AJ; Albertini F
Phys Med Biol; 2014 Dec; 59(23):7181-94. PubMed ID: 25369148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of grid size on uniform scanning and IMPT plans in XiO treatment planning system for brain cancer.
Rana S; Zheng Y
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 16(5):447–456. PubMed ID: 26699310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessing the advantages of CFR-PEEK over titanium spinal stabilization implants in proton therapy-a phantom study.
Poel R; Belosi F; Albertini F; Walser M; Gisep A; Lomax AJ; Weber DC
Phys Med Biol; 2020 Dec; 65(24):245031. PubMed ID: 32315991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Experimental verification of IMPT treatment plans in an anthropomorphic phantom in the presence of delivery uncertainties.
Albertini F; Casiraghi M; Lorentini S; Rombi B; Lomax AJ
Phys Med Biol; 2011 Jul; 56(14):4415-31. PubMed ID: 21709345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of two commercial CT metal artifact reduction algorithms for use in proton radiotherapy treatment planning in the head and neck area.
Andersson KM; Dahlgren CV; Reizenstein J; Cao Y; Ahnesjö A; Thunberg P
Med Phys; 2018 Oct; 45(10):4329-4344. PubMed ID: 30076784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Dose perturbation effect of metallic spinal implants in proton beam therapy.
Jia Y; Zhao L; Cheng CW; McDonald MW; Das IJ
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 16(5):333-343. PubMed ID: 26699317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Single-energy intensity modulated proton therapy.
Farace P; Righetto R; Cianchetti M
Phys Med Biol; 2015 Oct; 60(19):N357-67. PubMed ID: 26352616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of prostate proton treatment planning technique, interfraction robustness, and analysis of single-field treatment feasibility.
Kirk ML; Tang S; Zhai H; Vapiwala N; Deville C; James P; Bekelman JE; Christodouleas JP; Tochner Z; Both S
Pract Radiat Oncol; 2015; 5(2):99-105. PubMed ID: 25413411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Iterative metal artifact reduction improves dose calculation accuracy : Phantom study with dental implants.
Maerz M; Mittermair P; Krauss A; Koelbl O; Dobler B
Strahlenther Onkol; 2016 Jun; 192(6):403-13. PubMed ID: 26968180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Improvement of dose calculation in radiation therapy due to metal artifact correction using the augmented likelihood image reconstruction.
Ziemann C; Stille M; Cremers F; Buzug TM; Rades D
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 May; 19(3):227-233. PubMed ID: 29664225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparing cone-beam CT intensity correction methods for dose recalculation in adaptive intensity-modulated photon and proton therapy for head and neck cancer.
Kurz C; Dedes G; Resch A; Reiner M; Ganswindt U; Nijhuis R; Thieke C; Belka C; Parodi K; Landry G
Acta Oncol; 2015; 54(9):1651-7. PubMed ID: 26198654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A dosimetric comparison of intensity-modulated proton therapy optimization techniques for pediatric craniopharyngiomas: a clinical case study.
Yeung D; McKenzie C; Indelicato DJ
Pediatr Blood Cancer; 2014 Jan; 61(1):89-94. PubMed ID: 24000229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of gastric-cancer radiotherapy performed with volumetric modulated arc therapy or single-field uniform-dose proton therapy.
Mondlane G; Gubanski M; Lind PA; Ureba A; Siegbahn A
Acta Oncol; 2017 Jun; 56(6):832-838. PubMed ID: 28281357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Feasibility of MRI-only treatment planning for proton therapy in brain and prostate cancers: Dose calculation accuracy in substitute CT images.
Koivula L; Wee L; Korhonen J
Med Phys; 2016 Aug; 43(8):4634. PubMed ID: 27487880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Dental amalgam artifact: Adverse impact on tumor visualization and proton beam treatment planning in oral and oropharyngeal cancers.
Richard P; Sandison G; Dang Q; Johnson B; Wong T; Parvathaneni U
Pract Radiat Oncol; 2015; 5(6):e583-8. PubMed ID: 26419441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of intrafraction prostate motion on proton pencil beam scanning delivery: a quantitative assessment.
Tang S; Deville C; McDonough J; Tochner Z; Wang KK; Vapiwala N; Both S
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2013 Oct; 87(2):375-82. PubMed ID: 23958148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The effects of titanium mesh on passive-scattering proton dose.
Lin H; Ding X; Yin L; Zhai H; Liu H; Kassaee A; Hill-Kayser C; Lustig RA; McDonough J; Both S
Phys Med Biol; 2014 May; 59(10):N81-9. PubMed ID: 24778368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Commissioning an in-room mobile CT for adaptive proton therapy with a compact proton system.
Oliver JA; Zeidan O; Meeks SL; Shah AP; Pukala J; Kelly P; Ramakrishna NR; Willoughby TR
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 May; 19(3):149-158. PubMed ID: 29682879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Independent dose verification system with Monte Carlo simulations using TOPAS for passive scattering proton therapy at the National Cancer Center in Korea.
Shin WG; Testa M; Kim HS; Jeong JH; Lee SB; Kim YJ; Min CH
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Sep; 62(19):7598-7616. PubMed ID: 28809759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Is it necessary to plan with safety margins for actively scanned proton therapy?
Albertini F; Hug EB; Lomax AJ
Phys Med Biol; 2011 Jul; 56(14):4399-413. PubMed ID: 21709340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
