References
Ahamad et al. IMRT after hysterectomy: comparison with conventional treatment and
sensitivity of the normal-tissue-sparing effect to margin size
.
IJROBP 2005; 62: 1117-24.
Georg et al. Factors influencing bowel sparing in intensity modulated whole pelvic
radiotherapy for gynaecological malignancies
.
Radiother Oncol 2006; 80: 19-26
Hall EJ et al. Radiation-induced second cancers: the impact of 3D-CRT and IMRT
.
IJROBP
2003;56:83-88.
Herrera FG et al. Retrospective feasibility study of simultaneous integrated boost in cervical
cancer using Tomotherapy: the impact of organ motion and tumor regression. Radiat Oncol
2013; 8: 5.
Lin et al. Propensity Score-based Comparison of Long-term Outcomes With 3-Dimensional
Conformal Radiotherapy vs IMRT for Esophageal Cancer IJROBP 2012;84(5):1078-1085
Muirhead et al, An evidence based UK IMRT solution for anal cancer:the development of the
control arm for future UK led clinical trials. NCRI meeting 2013
http://conference.ncri.org.ukNicolini G et al. Volumetric modulation arc radiotherapy with flattening filter-free beams
compared with static gantry IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy for advanced esophageal
cancer: A feasibility study. IJROBP 2012;84:553-560.
Salz et al. Does IMRT increase the peripheral radiation dose? A comparison of treatment
plans 2000 and 2010
.
Z Med Phys 2012; 22: 6-12.
Teoh et al. Rectal Radiotherapy–IMRT delivery delineation and doses. Clin Oncol 2016;28:93
Zwahlen DR et al. Effect of intensity-modulated pelvic radiotherapy on second cancer risk in
the postoperative treatment of endometrial and cervical cancer
.
IJROBP 2009; 74: 539-45.
van de Bunt et al. Conventional, conformal, and IMRT treatment planning of external beam
radiotherapy for cervical cancer: The impact of tumor regression
.
IJROBP 2006; 64: 189-96.