198 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36576418)
1. Effectiveness of robust optimization against geometric uncertainties in TomoHelical planning for prostate cancer.
Yagihashi T; Inoue K; Nagata H; Yamanaka M; Yamano A; Suzuki S; Yamakabe W; Sato N; Omura M; Inoue T
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2023 Apr; 24(4):e13881. PubMed ID: 36576418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Robust optimization in lung treatment plans accounting for geometric uncertainty.
Zhang X; Rong Y; Morrill S; Fang J; Narayanasamy G; Galhardo E; Maraboyina S; Croft C; Xia F; Penagaricano J
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 May; 19(3):19-26. PubMed ID: 29524301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Comparing Efficacy Between Robust and PTV Margin-based Optimizations for Interfractional Anatomical Variations in Prostate Tomotherapy.
Yagihashi T; Inoue T; Shiba S; Yamano A; Yamanaka M; Sato N; Inoue K; Omura M; Nagata H
In Vivo; 2024; 38(1):409-417. PubMed ID: 38148099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of OAR dose sparing and plan robustness of beam-specific PTV in lung cancer IMRT treatment.
Chang Y; Xiao F; Quan H; Yang Z
Radiat Oncol; 2020 Oct; 15(1):241. PubMed ID: 33069253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Target miss using PTV-based IMRT compared to robust optimization via coverage probability concept in prostate cancer.
Outaggarts Z; Wegener D; Berger B; Zips D; Paulsen F; Bleif M; Thorwarth D; Alber M; Dohm O; Müller AC
Acta Oncol; 2020 Aug; 59(8):911-917. PubMed ID: 32436467
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Robust optimization of VMAT for prostate cancer accounting for geometric uncertainty.
Wada T; Kawahara D; Murakami Y; Nakashima T; Nagata Y
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2022 Sep; 23(9):e13738. PubMed ID: 35920105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Dosimetric comparison of MR-linac-based IMRT and conventional VMAT treatment plans for prostate cancer.
Da Silva Mendes V; Nierer L; Li M; Corradini S; Reiner M; Kamp F; Niyazi M; Kurz C; Landry G; Belka C
Radiat Oncol; 2021 Jul; 16(1):133. PubMed ID: 34289868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Implementation and experimental validation of a robust hybrid direct aperture optimization approach for mixed-beam radiotherapy.
Heath E; Mueller S; Guyer G; Duetschler A; Elicin O; Aebersold D; Fix MK; Manser P
Med Phys; 2021 Nov; 48(11):7299-7312. PubMed ID: 34585756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Robust mixed electron-photon radiation therapy optimization.
Renaud MA; Serban M; Seuntjens J
Med Phys; 2019 Mar; 46(3):1384-1396. PubMed ID: 30628079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Characterization of Photon Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Robustness in Patients With Prostate Cancer as a Proposed Benchmark for Proton Therapy Robustness Evaluation.
Maas JA; McDonald AM; Cardan RA; Snider JW; Fiveash JB; Kole AJ
Pract Radiat Oncol; 2024; 14(1):e68-e74. PubMed ID: 37748679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessment of IMPT versus VMAT plans using different uncertainty scenarios for prostate cancer.
Butkus MP; Brovold N; Diwanji T; Xu Y; De Ornelas M; Dal Pra A; Abramowitz M; Pollack A; Dogan N
Radiat Oncol; 2022 Sep; 17(1):162. PubMed ID: 36175971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Robust treatment planning with conditional value at risk chance constraints in intensity-modulated proton therapy.
An Y; Liang J; Schild SE; Bues M; Liu W
Med Phys; 2017 Jan; 44(1):28-36. PubMed ID: 28044325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Helical tomotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma-any advantages over conventional intensity-modulated radiotherapy?
Wu WC; Mui WL; Fung WK
Med Dosim; 2010; 35(2):122-7. PubMed ID: 19931024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assessment of HDR brachytherapy-replicating prostate radiotherapy planning for tomotherapy, cyberknife and VMAT.
de Chavez R; Grogan G; Hug B; Howe K; Grigg A; Waterhouse D; Lane J; Glyde A; Brown E; Bydder S; Pryor D; Hargrave C; Charles PH; Hellyer J; Ebert MA
Med Dosim; 2022 Spring; 47(1):61-69. PubMed ID: 34551879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The impact of margin reduction on radiation dose distribution of ultra-hypofractionated prostate radiotherapy utilizing a 1.5-T MR-Linac.
Onal C; Efe E; Bozca R; Yavas C; Yavas G; Arslan G
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2024 Jan; 25(1):e14179. PubMed ID: 38013636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Robust optimization to reduce the impact of biological effect variation from physical uncertainties in intensity-modulated proton therapy.
Bai X; Lim G; Grosshans D; Mohan R; Cao W
Phys Med Biol; 2019 Jan; 64(2):025004. PubMed ID: 30523932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
