471 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31913508)
21. Film-based dose validation of Monte Carlo algorithm for Cyberknife system with a CIRS thorax phantom.
Pan Y; Yang R; Li J; Zhang X; Liu L; Wang J
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 May; 19(3):142-148. PubMed ID: 29603564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Monte Carlo calculation of helical tomotherapy dose delivery.
Zhao YL; Mackenzie M; Kirkby C; Fallone BG
Med Phys; 2008 Aug; 35(8):3491-500. PubMed ID: 18777909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. A novel Monte Carlo (MC) dose model for small MLC fields of the cyberknife
Neupane T; Galanakou P; Shang C; Leventouri T; Kasper M; Muhammad W
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2023 Apr; 24(4):e13880. PubMed ID: 36651219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Treatment verification in the presence of inhomogeneities using EPID-based three-dimensional dose reconstruction.
van Elmpt WJ; Nijsten SM; Dekker AL; Mijnheer BJ; Lambin P
Med Phys; 2007 Jul; 34(7):2816-26. PubMed ID: 17821989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. A method of dose reconstruction for moving targets compatible with dynamic treatments.
Poulsen PR; Schmidt ML; Keall P; Worm ES; Fledelius W; Hoffmann L
Med Phys; 2012 Oct; 39(10):6237-46. PubMed ID: 23039659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Influence of CyberKnife Prescription Isodose Line on the Discrepancy of Dose Results Calculated by the Ray Tracing and Monte Carlo Algorithms for Head and Lung Plans: A Phantom Study.
Yang J; Liu G; Liu HY; Nie X; Yang ZY; Han J; Zhang S; Liang ZW
Curr Med Sci; 2020 Apr; 40(2):301-306. PubMed ID: 32337689
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Comparison of the accuracy of Monte Carlo and Ray Tracing dose calculation algorithms for multiple target brain treatments on CyberKnife.
Mukwada G; Skorska M; Rowshanfarzad P; Ebert MA
Phys Eng Sci Med; 2023 Dec; 46(4):1477-1487. PubMed ID: 37552365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Experimental evaluation of a GPU-based Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm in the Monaco treatment planning system.
Paudel MR; Kim A; Sarfehnia A; Ahmad SB; Beachey DJ; Sahgal A; Keller BM
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 Nov; 17(6):230-241. PubMed ID: 27929496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Dosimetric comparison of pencil beam and Monte Carlo algorithms in conformal lung radiotherapy.
Elcim Y; Dirican B; Yavas O
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 Sep; 19(5):616-624. PubMed ID: 30079474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. A fast GPU-accelerated Monte Carlo engine for calculation of MLC-collimated electron fields.
Brost EE; Wan Chan Tseung H; Antolak JA
Med Phys; 2023 Jan; 50(1):600-618. PubMed ID: 35986907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The use of non-standard CT conversion ramps for Monte Carlo verification of 6 MV prostate IMRT plans.
Zarza-Moreno M; Cardoso I; Teixeira N; Jesus AP; Mora G
Phys Med; 2013 Jun; 29(4):357-67. PubMed ID: 22677401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Experimental evaluations of the accuracy of 3D and 4D planning in robotic tracking stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung cancers.
Chan MK; Kwong DL; Ng SC; Tong AS; Tam EK
Med Phys; 2013 Apr; 40(4):041712. PubMed ID: 23556882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Validation of the Swiss Monte Carlo Plan for a static and dynamic 6 MV photon beam.
Magaddino V; Manser P; Frei D; Volken W; Schmidhalter D; Hirschi L; Fix MK
Z Med Phys; 2011 May; 21(2):124-34. PubMed ID: 21239148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The influence of beam model differences in the comparison of dose calculation algorithms for lung cancer treatment planning.
Chetty IJ; Rosu M; McShan DL; Fraass BA; Ten Haken RK
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Mar; 50(5):801-15. PubMed ID: 15798256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Stereotactic, single-dose irradiation of lung tumors: a comparison of absolute dose and dose distribution between pencil beam and Monte Carlo algorithms based on actual patient CT scans.
Chen H; Lohr F; Fritz P; Wenz F; Dobler B; Lorenz F; Mühlnickel W
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2010 Nov; 78(3):955-63. PubMed ID: 20171796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Dosimetric comparison of iPlan
Menon SV; Paramu R; Bhasi S; Gopalakrishnan Z; Bhaskaran S; Nair RK
Med Dosim; 2020 Autumn; 45(3):225-234. PubMed ID: 32001069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Monte Carlo implementation, validation, and characterization of a 120 leaf MLC.
Fix MK; Volken W; Frei D; Frauchiger D; Born EJ; Manser P
Med Phys; 2011 Oct; 38(10):5311-20. PubMed ID: 21992349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Dosimetric evaluation of a commercial proton spot scanning Monte-Carlo dose algorithm: comparisons against measurements and simulations.
Saini J; Maes D; Egan A; Bowen SR; St James S; Janson M; Wong T; Bloch C
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Sep; 62(19):7659-7681. PubMed ID: 28749373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. MLC parameters from static fields to VMAT plans: an evaluation in a RT-dedicated MC environment (PRIMO).
Paganini L; Reggiori G; Stravato A; Palumbo V; Mancosu P; Lobefalo F; Gaudino A; Fogliata A; Scorsetti M; Tomatis S
Radiat Oncol; 2019 Dec; 14(1):216. PubMed ID: 31791355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Development of a Geant4-based independent patient dose validation system with an elaborate multileaf collimator simulation model.
Choi HJ; Park H; Shin WG; Kim JI; Min CH
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Feb; 20(2):94-106. PubMed ID: 30672648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
