105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32799050)
1. Patient-specific quality assurance and plan dose errors on breast intensity-modulated proton therapy.
Liu C; Zheng D; Bradley JA; Vega RBM; Li Z; Mendenhall NP; Liang X
Phys Med; 2020 Sep; 77():84-91. PubMed ID: 32799050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A comprehensive dosimetric study of Monte Carlo and pencil-beam algorithms on intensity-modulated proton therapy for breast cancer.
Liang X; Li Z; Zheng D; Bradley JA; Rutenberg M; Mendenhall N
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Jan; 20(1):128-136. PubMed ID: 30488548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Radiobiological and dosimetric impact of RayStation pencil beam and Monte Carlo algorithms on intensity-modulated proton therapy breast cancer plans.
Rana S; Greco K; Samuel EJJ; Bennouna J
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Aug; 20(8):36-46. PubMed ID: 31343826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Is an analytical dose engine sufficient for intensity modulated proton therapy in lung cancer?
Teoh S; Fiorini F; George B; Vallis KA; Van den Heuvel F
Br J Radiol; 2020 Mar; 93(1107):20190583. PubMed ID: 31696729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Impact of grid size on uniform scanning and IMPT plans in XiO treatment planning system for brain cancer.
Rana S; Zheng Y
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 16(5):447–456. PubMed ID: 26699310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Feasibility study of fast intensity-modulated proton therapy dose prediction method using deep neural networks for prostate cancer.
Wang W; Chang Y; Liu Y; Liang Z; Liao Y; Qin B; Liu X; Yang Z
Med Phys; 2022 Aug; 49(8):5451-5463. PubMed ID: 35543109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Technical Note: Treatment planning system (TPS) approximations matter - comparing intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) plan quality and robustness between a commercial and an in-house developed TPS for nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Liu C; Yu NY; Shan J; Bhangoo RS; Daniels TB; Chiang JS; Ding X; Lara P; Patrick CL; Archuleta JP; DeWees T; Hu Y; Schild SE; Bues M; Sio TT; Liu W
Med Phys; 2019 Nov; 46(11):4755-4762. PubMed ID: 31498885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessment of Monte Carlo algorithm for compliance with RTOG 0915 dosimetric criteria in peripheral lung cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy.
Pokhrel D; Sood S; Badkul R; Jiang H; McClinton C; Lominska C; Kumar P; Wang F
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 May; 17(3):277-293. PubMed ID: 27167284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Transitioning from measurement-based to combined patient-specific quality assurance for intensity-modulated proton therapy.
Chen M; Yepes P; Hojo Y; Poenisch F; Li Y; Chen J; Xu C; He X; Gunn GB; Frank SJ; Sahoo N; Li H; Zhu XR; Zhang X
Br J Radiol; 2020 Mar; 93(1107):20190669. PubMed ID: 31799859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effect of the normalized prescription isodose line on the magnitude of Monte Carlo vs. pencil beam target dose differences for lung stereotactic body radiotherapy.
Zheng D; Zhang Q; Liang X; Zhu X; Verma V; Wang S; Zhou S
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 Jul; 17(4):48-58. PubMed ID: 27455476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The impact of dose algorithms on tumor control probability in intensity-modulated proton therapy for breast cancer.
Liang X; Bradley JA; Zheng D; Rutenberg M; Mailhot Vega R; Mendenhall N; Li Z
Phys Med; 2019 May; 61():52-57. PubMed ID: 31151579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The 3D isodose structure-based method for clinical dose distributions comparison in pretreatment patient-QA.
Tamborra P; Martinucci E; Massafra R; Bettiol M; Capomolla C; Zagari A; Didonna V
Med Phys; 2019 Feb; 46(2):426-436. PubMed ID: 30450559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Stereotactic radiotherapy of intrapulmonary lesions: comparison of different dose calculation algorithms for Oncentra MasterPlan®.
Troeller A; Garny S; Pachmann S; Kantz S; Gerum S; Manapov F; Ganswindt U; Belka C; Söhn M
Radiat Oncol; 2015 Feb; 10():51. PubMed ID: 25888786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of 4-Hz log files and secondary Monte Carlo dose calculation as patient-specific quality assurance for VMAT prostate plans.
Szeverinski P; Kowatsch M; Künzler T; Meinschad M; Clemens P; DeVries AF
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2021 Jul; 22(7):235-244. PubMed ID: 34151502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A noise correction of the γ-index method for Monte Carlo dose distribution comparison.
Cohilis M; Sterpin E; Lee JA; Souris K
Med Phys; 2020 Feb; 47(2):681-692. PubMed ID: 31660623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Pretreatment patient-specific quality assurance prediction based on 1D complexity metrics and 3D planning dose: classification, gamma passing rates, and DVH metrics.
Chen L; Luo H; Li S; Tan X; Feng B; Yang X; Wang Y; Jin F
Radiat Oncol; 2023 Nov; 18(1):192. PubMed ID: 37986008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Dosimetric and radiobiological impact of intensity modulated proton therapy and RapidArc planning for high-risk prostate cancer with seminal vesicles.
Rana S; Cheng C; Zhao L; Park S; Larson G; Vargas C; Dunn M; Zheng Y
J Med Radiat Sci; 2017 Mar; 64(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 27741379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Impact of dose calculation accuracy during optimization on lung IMRT plan quality.
Li Y; Rodrigues A; Li T; Yuan L; Yin FF; Wu QJ
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Jan; 16(1):5137. PubMed ID: 25679172
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Quantitative evaluation of 3D dosimetry for stereotactic volumetric-modulated arc delivery using COMPASS.
Vikraman S; Manigandan D; Karrthick KP; Sambasivaselli R; Senniandavar V; Ramu M; Rajesh T; Lutz M; Muthukumaran M; Karthikeyan N; Tejinder K
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2014 Jan; 16(1):5128. PubMed ID: 25679152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
