127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32363800)
1. On the complexity of helical tomotherapy treatment plans.
Santos T; Ventura T; Mateus J; Capela M; Lopes MDC
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2020 Jul; 21(7):107-118. PubMed ID: 32363800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Evaluation of the complexity of treatment plans from a national IMRT/VMAT audit - Towards a plan complexity score.
Santos T; Ventura T; Lopes MDC
Phys Med; 2020 Feb; 70():75-84. PubMed ID: 31982790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Conversion of helical tomotherapy plans to step-and-shoot IMRT plans--Pareto front evaluation of plans from a new treatment planning system.
Petersson K; Ceberg C; Engström P; Benedek H; Nilsson P; Knöös T
Med Phys; 2011 Jun; 38(6):3130-8. PubMed ID: 21815387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quantitative assessment of helical tomotherapy plans complexity.
Cavinato S; Fusella M; Paiusco M; Scaggion A
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2023 Jan; 24(1):e13781. PubMed ID: 36523156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Fluence-weighted average subfield size in helical TomoTherapy.
Howitz S; Wiezorek T; Wittig A; Vorwerk H; Zink K
Z Med Phys; 2019 Dec; 29(4):337-348. PubMed ID: 31056376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Texture analysis on the fluence map to evaluate the degree of modulation for volumetric modulated arc therapy.
Park SY; Kim IH; Ye SJ; Carlson J; Park JM
Med Phys; 2014 Nov; 41(11):111718. PubMed ID: 25370632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Converting Treatment Plans From Helical Tomotherapy to L-Shape Linac: Clinical Workflow and Dosimetric Evaluation.
Yuan Z; Nair CK; Benedict SH; Valicenti RK; Rao S; Fragoso RC; Wright C; Qiu J; Rong Y
Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Jan; 17():1533033818785279. PubMed ID: 29986638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Helical tomotherapy to LINAC plan conversion utilizing RayStation Fallback planning.
Zhang X; Penagaricano J; Narayanasamy G; Corry P; Liu T; Sanjay M; Paudel N; Morrill S
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Jan; 18(1):178-185. PubMed ID: 28291935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Robotic MLC-based plans: A study of plan complexity.
Masi L; Hernandez V; Saez J; Doro R; Livi L
Med Phys; 2021 Mar; 48(3):942-952. PubMed ID: 33332628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Quantification of beam complexity in intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatment plans.
Du W; Cho SH; Zhang X; Hoffman KE; Kudchadker RJ
Med Phys; 2014 Feb; 41(2):021716. PubMed ID: 24506607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Helical tomotherapy versus single-arc intensity-modulated arc therapy: a collaborative dosimetric comparison between two institutions.
Rong Y; Tang G; Welsh JS; Mohiuddin MM; Paliwal B; Yu CX
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2011 Sep; 81(1):284-96. PubMed ID: 21236598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Dosimetric effects of rotational output variation and x-ray target degradation on helical tomotherapy plans.
Staton RJ; Langen KM; Kupelian PA; Meeks SL
Med Phys; 2009 Jul; 36(7):2881-8. PubMed ID: 19673187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of plan quality provided by intensity-modulated arc therapy and helical tomotherapy.
Cao D; Holmes TW; Afghan MK; Shepard DM
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2007 Sep; 69(1):240-50. PubMed ID: 17707278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Helical tomotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: dosimetric comparison with linear accelerator-based step-and-shoot IMRT.
Murthy V; Master Z; Gupta T; Ghosh-Laskar S; Budrukkar A; Phurailatpam R; Agarwal J
J Cancer Res Ther; 2010; 6(2):194-8. PubMed ID: 20622367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Potential clinical efficacy of intensity-modulated conformal therapy.
Meeks SL; Buatti JM; Bova FJ; Friedman WA; Mendenhall WM; Zlotecki RA
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1998 Jan; 40(2):483-95. PubMed ID: 9457839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effects of changing modulation and pitch parameters on tomotherapy delivery quality assurance plans.
Binny D; Lancaster CM; Harris S; Sylvander SR
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 16(5):87–105. PubMed ID: 26699293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical implementation of Dosimetry Check™ for TomoTherapy
Chung E; Kwon D; Park T; Kang H; Chung Y
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 Nov; 19(6):193-199. PubMed ID: 30354001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparing the quality of passively-scattered proton and photon tomotherapy plans for brain and head and neck disease sites.
Kainz K; Firat S; Wilson JF; Schultz C; Siker M; Wang A; Olson D; Li XA
Phys Med Biol; 2015 Mar; 60(6):2167-77. PubMed ID: 25683607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
