136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27806610)
1. On the new metrics for IMRT QA verification.
Garcia-Romero A; Hernandez-Vitoria A; Millan-Cebrian E; Alba-Escorihuela V; Serrano-Zabaleta S; Ortega-Pardina P
Med Phys; 2016 Nov; 43(11):6058. PubMed ID: 27806610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. On the use of biomathematical models in patient-specific IMRT dose QA.
Zhen H; Nelms BE; Tomé WA
Med Phys; 2013 Jul; 40(7):071702. PubMed ID: 23822406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Response-probability volume histograms and iso-probability of response charts in treatment plan evaluation.
Mavroidis P; Ferreira BC; Lopes Mdo C
Med Phys; 2011 May; 38(5):2382-97. PubMed ID: 21776773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Assessing the shift of radiobiological metrics in lung radiotherapy plans using 2D gamma index.
Chaikh A; Balosso J
Transl Lung Cancer Res; 2016 Jun; 5(3):265-71. PubMed ID: 27413708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Patient-specific 3D pretreatment and potential 3D online dose verification of Monte Carlo-calculated IMRT prostate treatment plans.
Boggula R; Jahnke L; Wertz H; Lohr F; Wenz F
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2011 Nov; 81(4):1168-75. PubMed ID: 21093168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Online adaptation and verification of VMAT.
Crijns W; Defraene G; Van Herck H; Depuydt T; Haustermans K; Maes F; Van den Heuvel F
Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):3877-91. PubMed ID: 26133589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Radiobiological impact of dose calculation algorithms on biologically optimized IMRT lung stereotactic body radiation therapy plans.
Liang X; Penagaricano J; Zheng D; Morrill S; Zhang X; Corry P; Griffin RJ; Han EY; Hardee M; Ratanatharathom V
Radiat Oncol; 2016 Jan; 11():10. PubMed ID: 26800883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Dosimetric and radiobiological comparison for quality assurance of IMRT and VMAT plans.
Paudel NR; Narayanasamy G; Han EY; Penagaricano J; Mavroidis P; Zhang X; Pyakuryal A; Kim D; Liang X; Morrill S
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Sep; 18(5):237-244. PubMed ID: 28771941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Assessment of radiobiological metrics applied to patient-specific QA process of VMAT prostate treatments.
Clemente-Gutiérrez F; Pérez-Vara C; Clavo-Herranz MH; López-Carrizosa C; Pérez-Regadera J; Ibáñez-Villoslada C
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 Mar; 17(2):341-367. PubMed ID: 27074458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Moving from gamma passing rates to patient DVH-based QA metrics in pretreatment dose QA.
Zhen H; Nelms BE; Tome WA
Med Phys; 2011 Oct; 38(10):5477-89. PubMed ID: 21992366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Sensitivity of volumetric modulated arc therapy patient specific QA results to multileaf collimator errors and correlation to dose volume histogram based metrics.
Coleman L; Skourou C
Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):111715. PubMed ID: 24320423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. A clinically relevant IMRT QA workflow: Design and validation.
Stambaugh C; Ezzell G
Med Phys; 2018 Apr; 45(4):1391-1399. PubMed ID: 29481698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Phantomless patient-specific TomoTherapy QA via delivery performance monitoring and a secondary Monte Carlo dose calculation.
Handsfield LL; Jones R; Wilson DD; Siebers JV; Read PW; Chen Q
Med Phys; 2014 Oct; 41(10):101703. PubMed ID: 25281942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Tomotherapy treatment plan quality assurance: the impact of applied criteria on passing rate in gamma index method.
Bresciani S; Di Dia A; Maggio A; Cutaia C; Miranti A; Infusino E; Stasi M
Med Phys; 2013 Dec; 40(12):121711. PubMed ID: 24320497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Quantitative assessment of the accuracy of dose calculation using pencil beam and Monte Carlo algorithms and requirements for clinical quality assurance.
Ali I; Ahmad S
Med Dosim; 2013; 38(3):255-61. PubMed ID: 23558145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Quantification of uncertainties in conventional plan evaluation methods in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy.
Anbumani S; Arunai Nambi Raj N; S Prabhakar G; Anchineyan P; Bilimagga RS; Palled SR; Chairmadhurai A
J BUON; 2014; 19(1):297-303. PubMed ID: 24659679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Three-dimensional dose prediction and validation with the radiobiological gamma index based on a relative seriality model for head-and-neck IMRT.
Hamatani N; Sumida I; Takahashi Y; Oda M; Seo Y; Isohashi F; Tamari K; Ogawa K
J Radiat Res; 2017 Sep; 58(5):701-709. PubMed ID: 28430990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
