217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28300378)
1. Comparison of linear and nonlinear programming approaches for "worst case dose" and "minmax" robust optimization of intensity-modulated proton therapy dose distributions.
Zaghian M; Cao W; Liu W; Kardar L; Randeniya S; Mohan R; Lim G
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 18(2):15-25. PubMed ID: 28300378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Effectiveness of robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy planning for head and neck cancers.
Liu W; Frank SJ; Li X; Li Y; Park PC; Dong L; Ronald Zhu X; Mohan R
Med Phys; 2013 May; 40(5):051711. PubMed ID: 23635259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Robust optimization of intensity modulated proton therapy.
Liu W; Zhang X; Li Y; Mohan R
Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):1079-91. PubMed ID: 22320818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Multi-scenario based robust intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plans can account for set-up errors more effectively in terms of normal tissue sparing than planning target volume (PTV) based intensity-modulated photon plans in the head and neck region.
Stuschke M; Kaiser A; Abu Jawad J; Pöttgen C; Levegrün S; Farr J
Radiat Oncol; 2013 Jun; 8():145. PubMed ID: 23773560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Influence of robust optimization in intensity-modulated proton therapy with different dose delivery techniques.
Liu W; Li Y; Li X; Cao W; Zhang X
Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6):3089-101. PubMed ID: 22755694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Quantification of plan robustness against different uncertainty sources for classical and anatomical robust optimized treatment plans in head and neck cancer proton therapy.
Cubillos-Mesías M; Troost EGC; Lohaus F; Agolli L; Rehm M; Richter C; Stützer K
Br J Radiol; 2020 Mar; 93(1107):20190573. PubMed ID: 31778315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Uncertainty incorporated beam angle optimization for IMPT treatment planning.
Cao W; Lim GJ; Lee A; Li Y; Liu W; Ronald Zhu X; Zhang X
Med Phys; 2012 Aug; 39(8):5248-56. PubMed ID: 22894449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Improve the dosimetric outcome in bilateral head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment using spot-scanning proton arc (SPArc) therapy: a feasibility study.
Liu G; Li X; Qin A; Zheng W; Yan D; Zhang S; Stevens C; Kabolizadeh P; Ding X
Radiat Oncol; 2020 Jan; 15(1):21. PubMed ID: 32000817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Impact of robust treatment planning on single- and multi-field optimized plans for proton beam therapy of unilateral head and neck target volumes.
Cubillos-Mesías M; Baumann M; Troost EGC; Lohaus F; Löck S; Richter C; Stützer K
Radiat Oncol; 2017 Nov; 12(1):190. PubMed ID: 29183377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Including robustness in multi-criteria optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy.
Chen W; Unkelbach J; Trofimov A; Madden T; Kooy H; Bortfeld T; Craft D
Phys Med Biol; 2012 Feb; 57(3):591-608. PubMed ID: 22222720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Simultaneous beam geometry and intensity map optimization in intensity-modulated radiation therapy.
Lee EK; Fox T; Crocker I
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2006 Jan; 64(1):301-20. PubMed ID: 16289912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Minimax optimization for handling range and setup uncertainties in proton therapy.
Fredriksson A; Forsgren A; Hårdemark B
Med Phys; 2011 Mar; 38(3):1672-84. PubMed ID: 21520880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Advantages and limitations of the 'worst case scenario' approach in IMPT treatment planning.
Casiraghi M; Albertini F; Lomax AJ
Phys Med Biol; 2013 Mar; 58(5):1323-39. PubMed ID: 23391569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The influence of the optimization starting conditions on the robustness of intensity-modulated proton therapy plans.
Albertini F; Hug EB; Lomax AJ
Phys Med Biol; 2010 May; 55(10):2863-78. PubMed ID: 20427853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The energy margin strategy for reducing dose variation due to setup uncertainty in intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT) delivered with distal edge tracking (DET).
Zhang M; Flynn RT; Mo X; Mackie TR
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2012 Sep; 13(5):3863. PubMed ID: 22955652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Helical tomotherapy and intensity modulated proton therapy in the treatment of dominant intraprostatic lesion: a treament planning comparison.
Fellin F; Azzeroni R; Maggio A; Lorentini S; Cozzarini C; Di Muzio N; Fiorino C; Calandrino R; Schwarz M
Radiother Oncol; 2013 May; 107(2):207-12. PubMed ID: 23541644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Dosimetric comparison of three-dimensional conformal proton radiotherapy, intensity-modulated proton therapy, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for treatment of pediatric craniopharyngiomas.
Boehling NS; Grosshans DR; Bluett JB; Palmer MT; Song X; Amos RA; Sahoo N; Meyer JJ; Mahajan A; Woo SY
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2012 Feb; 82(2):643-52. PubMed ID: 21277111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A fast and robust constraint-based online re-optimization approach for automated online adaptive intensity modulated proton therapy in head and neck cancer.
Oud M; Breedveld S; Rojo-Santiago J; Giżyńska MK; Kroesen M; Habraken S; Perkó Z; Heijmen B; Hoogeman M
Phys Med Biol; 2024 Mar; 69(7):. PubMed ID: 38373350
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
