FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2074959560> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2074959560 endingPage "3806" @default.
• W2074959560 startingPage "3806" @default.
• W2074959560 abstract "Purpose: To compare an advantage/disadvantage between Field-in-Field (FIF) technique and conventional physical wedge (PW) technique for a whole breast (WB) tangential field irradiation. Methods and Materials: Total 86 patients were included in this study. 46 of them were left breast cancer cases. FIF/PW plans were created by Eclipse (V7.3, Varian) with 6MV or 6MV mixed with 18MV. Plans had a same ioscenter location, beam setup and normalized isodose line selection for each case. Varian 21EX Linac with 120 MLC was used for beam delivery. Two plans were compared by PTV encompassed by 95% isodose line (V95), dose inhomogeneity (DI), dose received by 10% volume of lung (D10), mean lung dose (MLD), dose received by 5% volume of heart (D5), Mean heart dose (MHD), total MU, maximum dose in the plan and the number of field needed for each fraction. Results: Comparing with PW plan, FIF plan showed an average percentage improvement of V95 was 0.1±1.6, DI was 0.6±5.0, MLD was 1.5±4.2, D5 was 2.0±8.8, MHD was 3.2±4.6. However, D10 increased by 1.4%±0.050. FIF lowered an average daily MU by 28.5%±0.080, maximum dose by 0.5%±0.018, and increased number of treatment field by 1.50±0.356. There were 12 cases treated with mixed beam in PW technique vs 10 in FIF technique. Conclusion: The advantages of FIF technique included: (1) Reduce radiation contamination to contra lateral breast and Linac room induced activity by remove the PW, lower MU and diminish a higher energy. (2) Time saving was not only from less MU but also from not need go into the treatment room for a wedge adjustment. (3) Reduced the therapist work load. (4) Regular MU 2nd check was applied because there was not FIF merge involved in the treatment field. With a MLC to shape the field and treatment record/verification system to control the treatment, increasing number of treatment field didn't show as a problem." @default.
• W2074959560 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2074959560 creator A5011275105 @default.
• W2074959560 creator A5049582533 @default.
• W2074959560 creator A5068182606 @default.
• W2074959560 date "2012-06-01" @default.
• W2074959560 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2074959560 title "SU-E-T-440: Dosimetry Parameter Comparison between Field-In-Field Technique and Conventional Physical Wedge Technique for Whole Breast Radiation Treatment" @default.
• W2074959560 doi "https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4735529" @default.
• W2074959560 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28517232" @default.
• W2074959560 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W2074959560 type Work @default.
• W2074959560 sameAs 2074959560 @default.
• W2074959560 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2074959560 countsByYear W20749595602018 @default.
• W2074959560 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2074959560 hasAuthorship W2074959560A5011275105 @default.
• W2074959560 hasAuthorship W2074959560A5049582533 @default.
• W2074959560 hasAuthorship W2074959560A5068182606 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C120665830 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C168834538 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C180048950 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C3019527723 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C47422493 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C509974204 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConcept C75088862 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C120665830 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C121332964 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C126838900 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C168834538 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C180048950 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C2989005 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C3019527723 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C47422493 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C509974204 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C71924100 @default.
• W2074959560 hasConceptScore W2074959560C75088862 @default.
• W2074959560 hasIssue "6Part16" @default.
• W2074959560 hasLocation W20749595601 @default.
• W2074959560 hasLocation W20749595602 @default.
• W2074959560 hasOpenAccess W2074959560 @default.
• W2074959560 hasPrimaryLocation W20749595601 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W1971381168 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W1974147508 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W1987596081 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W1993254157 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W2014552055 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W2057866741 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W2109056549 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W2133302292 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W2153807622 @default.
• W2074959560 hasRelatedWork W2404618845 @default.
• W2074959560 hasVolume "39" @default.
• W2074959560 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2074959560 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2074959560 magId "2074959560" @default.
• W2074959560 workType "article" @default.