These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30234498)
1. Alternatives to patient specific verification measurements in proton therapy: a comparative experimental study with intentional errors. Matter M; Nenoff L; Meier G; Weber DC; Lomax AJ; Albertini F Phys Med Biol; 2018 Oct; 63(20):205014. PubMed ID: 30234498 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A method to reconstruct and apply 3D primary fluence for treatment delivery verification. Liu S; Mazur TR; Li H; Curcuru A; Green OL; Sun B; Mutic S; Yang D J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Jan; 18(1):128-138. PubMed ID: 28291913 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Impact of machine log-files uncertainties on the quality assurance of proton pencil beam scanning treatment delivery. Toscano S; Souris K; Gomà C; Barragán-Montero A; Puydupin S; Stappen FV; Janssens G; Matic A; Geets X; Sterpin E Phys Med Biol; 2019 Apr; 64(9):095021. PubMed ID: 30897559 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Assessing the quality of proton PBS treatment delivery using machine log files: comprehensive analysis of clinical treatments delivered at PSI Gantry 2. Scandurra D; Albertini F; van der Meer R; Meier G; Weber DC; Bolsi A; Lomax A Phys Med Biol; 2016 Feb; 61(3):1171-81. PubMed ID: 26767316 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Implementation of phantom-less IMRT delivery verification using Varian DynaLog files and R/V output. Agnew CE; King RB; Hounsell AR; McGarry CK Phys Med Biol; 2012 Nov; 57(21):6761-77. PubMed ID: 23032423 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Log file based Monte Carlo calculations for proton pencil beam scanning therapy. Winterhalter C; Meier G; Oxley D; Weber DC; Lomax AJ; Safai S Phys Med Biol; 2019 Jan; 64(3):035014. PubMed ID: 30540984 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A machine learning-based framework for delivery error prediction in proton pencil beam scanning using irradiation log-files. Maes D; Bowen SR; Regmi R; Bloch C; Wong T; Rosenfeld A; Saini J Phys Med; 2020 Oct; 78():179-186. PubMed ID: 33038643 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Treatment log files as a tool to identify treatment plan sensitivity to inaccuracies in scanned proton beam delivery. Belosi MF; van der Meer R; Garcia de Acilu Laa P; Bolsi A; Weber DC; Lomax AJ Radiother Oncol; 2017 Dec; 125(3):514-519. PubMed ID: 29054379 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Monte Carlo based IMRT dose verification using MLC log files and R/V outputs. Luo W; Li J; Price RA; Chen L; Yang J; Fan J; Chen Z; McNeeley S; Xu X; Ma CM Med Phys; 2006 Jul; 33(7):2557-64. PubMed ID: 16898460 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Sensitivity study of an automated system for daily patient QA using EPID exit dose images. Zhuang AH; Olch AJ J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 May; 19(3):114-124. PubMed ID: 29508529 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Automatic detection and classification of treatment deviations in proton therapy from realistically simulated prompt gamma imaging data. Pietsch J; Khamfongkhruea C; Berthold J; Janssens G; Stützer K; Löck S; Richter C Med Phys; 2023 Jan; 50(1):506-517. PubMed ID: 36102783 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of machine log files/MC-based treatment planning and delivery QA as compared to ArcCHECK QA. Stanhope CW; Drake DG; Liang J; Alber M; Söhn M; Habib C; Willcut V; Yan D Med Phys; 2018 Jul; 45(7):2864-2874. PubMed ID: 29676463 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Development and long-term stability of a comprehensive daily QA program for a modern pencil beam scanning (PBS) proton therapy delivery system. Rana S; Bennouna J; Samuel EJJ; Gutierrez AN J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Apr; 20(4):29-44. PubMed ID: 30920146 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An artificial neural network based approach for predicting the proton beam spot dosimetric characteristics of a pencil beam scanning technique. Ranjith CP; Krishnan M; Raveendran V; Chaudhari L; Laskar S Biomed Phys Eng Express; 2024 Apr; 10(3):. PubMed ID: 38652667 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Factors influencing the performance of patient specific quality assurance for pencil beam scanning IMPT fields. Trnková P; Bolsi A; Albertini F; Weber DC; Lomax AJ Med Phys; 2016 Nov; 43(11):5998. PubMed ID: 27806620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Quality assurance for online adapted treatment plans: benchmarking and delivery monitoring simulation. Li T; Wu Q; Yang Y; Rodrigues A; Yin FF; Jackie Wu Q Med Phys; 2015 Jan; 42(1):381-90. PubMed ID: 25563278 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Impacts of gantry angle dependent scanning beam properties on proton PBS treatment. Lin Y; Clasie B; Lu HM; Flanz J; Shen T; Jee KW Phys Med Biol; 2017 Jan; 62(2):344-357. PubMed ID: 27997378 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Classification of the source of treatment deviation in proton therapy using prompt-gamma imaging information. Khamfongkhruea C; Berthold J; Janssens G; Petzoldt J; Smeets J; Pausch G; Richter C Med Phys; 2020 Oct; 47(10):5102-5111. PubMed ID: 32678913 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]