Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  1548-1549 / 2953 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 1548-1549 / 2953 Next Page
Page Background

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.uk

Nicolini 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.