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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

705 related items for PubMed ID: 15004663

  • 1. The comparison of radiotherapy techniques for treatment of the prostate cancer: the three-field vs. the four-field.
    Milecki P, Piotrowski T, Dymnicka M.
    Neoplasma; 2004; 51(1):64-9. PubMed ID: 15004663
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Dosimetry and radiobiologic model comparison of IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy in treatment of carcinoma of the prostate.
    Luxton G, Hancock SL, Boyer AL.
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2004 May 01; 59(1):267-84. PubMed ID: 15093924
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. A phase II trial for the optimisation of treatment position in the radiation therapy of prostate cancer.
    O'Neill L, Armstrong J, Buckney S, Assiri M, Cannon M, Holmberg O.
    Radiother Oncol; 2008 Jul 01; 88(1):61-6. PubMed ID: 18453021
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Comparative treatment planning on localized prostate carcinoma conformal photon- versus proton-based radiotherapy.
    Mock U, Bogner J, Georg D, Auberger T, Pötter R.
    Strahlenther Onkol; 2005 Jul 01; 181(7):448-55. PubMed ID: 15995838
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Dose distribution in 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: comparison of two treatment techniques (six coplanar fields and two dynamic arcs).
    Jereczek-Fossa BA, Cattani F, D'Onofrio A, Cambria R, Kowalczyk A, Corallo A, Vavassori A, Zerini D, Ivaldi GB, DeCobelli O, Orecchia R.
    Radiother Oncol; 2006 Dec 01; 81(3):294-302. PubMed ID: 17113670
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Evaluation of the dosimetric impact of non-exclusion of the rectum from the boost PTV in IMRT treatment plans for prostate cancer patients.
    Kassim I, Dirkx ML, Heijmen BJ.
    Radiother Oncol; 2009 Jul 01; 92(1):62-7. PubMed ID: 19278745
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. A dose-escalation trial with the adaptive radiotherapy process as a delivery system in localized prostate cancer: analysis of chronic toxicity.
    Brabbins D, Martinez A, Yan D, Lockman D, Wallace M, Gustafson G, Chen P, Vicini F, Wong J.
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Feb 01; 61(2):400-8. PubMed ID: 15667959
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Evaluation of the optimal co-planar field arrangement for use in the boost phase of dose escalated conformal radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.
    Khoo VS, Bedford JL, Webb S, Dearnaley DP.
    Br J Radiol; 2001 Feb 01; 74(878):177-82. PubMed ID: 11718391
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. A randomized trial of supine vs. prone positioning in patients undergoing escalated dose conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer.
    Bayley AJ, Catton CN, Haycocks T, Kelly V, Alasti H, Bristow R, Catton P, Crook J, Gospodarowicz MK, McLean M, Milosevic M, Warde P.
    Radiother Oncol; 2004 Jan 01; 70(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 15036850
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Dosimetric impact and theoretical clinical benefits of fiducial markers for dose escalated prostate cancer radiation treatment.
    Gauthier I, Carrier JF, Béliveau-Nadeau D, Fortin B, Taussky D.
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2009 Jul 15; 74(4):1128-33. PubMed ID: 19147306
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. The use of spatial dose gradients and probability density function to evaluate the effect of internal organ motion for prostate IMRT treatment planning.
    Jiang R, Barnett RB, Chow JC, Chen JZ.
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Mar 07; 52(5):1469-84. PubMed ID: 17301465
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Benefit of using biologic parameters (EUD and NTCP) in IMRT optimization for treatment of intrahepatic tumors.
    Thomas E, Chapet O, Kessler ML, Lawrence TS, Ten Haken RK.
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Jun 01; 62(2):571-8. PubMed ID: 15890602
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Phase II dose escalation study of image-guided adaptive radiotherapy for prostate cancer: use of dose-volume constraints to achieve rectal isotoxicity.
    Vargas C, Yan D, Kestin LL, Krauss D, Lockman DM, Brabbins DS, Martinez AA.
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Sep 01; 63(1):141-9. PubMed ID: 16111582
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Comparison of the conventional 'box technique' with two different 'conformal' beam arrangements for prostate cancer treatment.
    Magrini SM, Cellai E, Rossi F, Pertici M, Compagnucci A, Biti GP.
    Cancer Radiother; 1999 Sep 01; 3(3):215-20. PubMed ID: 10394339
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Radiobiological impact of reduced margins and treatment technique for prostate cancer in terms of tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP).
    Jensen I, Carl J, Lund B, Larsen EH, Nielsen J.
    Med Dosim; 2011 Sep 01; 36(2):130-7. PubMed ID: 20488692
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 36.