Dosimetric comparison of five different techniques for craniospinal irradiation across 15 European centers: analysis on behalf of the SIOP-E-BTG (radiotherapy working group).
dc.contributor.author | Seravalli, E | |
dc.contributor.author | Bosman, M | |
dc.contributor.author | Lassen-Ramshad, Y | |
dc.contributor.author | Vestergaard, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Oldenburger, F | |
dc.contributor.author | Visser, J | |
dc.contributor.author | Koutsouveli, E | |
dc.contributor.author | Paraskevopoulou, C | |
dc.contributor.author | Horan, G | |
dc.contributor.author | Ajithkumar, T | |
dc.contributor.author | Timmermann, B | |
dc.contributor.author | Fuentes, C | |
dc.contributor.author | Whitfield, Gillian A | |
dc.contributor.author | Marchant, Thomas E | |
dc.contributor.author | Padovani, L | |
dc.contributor.author | Garnier, E | |
dc.contributor.author | Gandola, L | |
dc.contributor.author | Meroni, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Hoeben, B | |
dc.contributor.author | Kusters, M | |
dc.contributor.author | Alapetite, Cl | |
dc.contributor.author | Losa, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Goudjil, F | |
dc.contributor.author | Magelssen, H | |
dc.contributor.author | Evensen, M | |
dc.contributor.author | Saran, F | |
dc.contributor.author | Smyth, G | |
dc.contributor.author | Rombi, B | |
dc.contributor.author | Righetto, R | |
dc.contributor.author | Kortmann, R | |
dc.contributor.author | Janssens, G | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-06-27T19:47:59Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-06-27T19:47:59Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2018-04-26 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Dosimetric comparison of five different techniques for craniospinal irradiation across 15 European centers: analysis on behalf of the SIOP-E-BTG (radiotherapy working group). 2018, 1-10 Acta Oncol | en |
dc.identifier.issn | 1651-226X | |
dc.identifier.pmid | 29698060 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/0284186X.2018.1465588 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10541/621050 | |
dc.description.abstract | Conventional techniques (3D-CRT) for craniospinal irradiation (CSI) are still widely used. Modern techniques (IMRT, VMAT, TomoTherapy®, proton pencil beam scanning [PBS]) are applied in a limited number of centers. For a 14-year-old patient, we aimed to compare dose distributions of five CSI techniques applied across Europe and generated according to the participating institute protocols, therefore representing daily practice. | |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.rights | Archived with thanks to Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) | en |
dc.title | Dosimetric comparison of five different techniques for craniospinal irradiation across 15 European centers: analysis on behalf of the SIOP-E-BTG (radiotherapy working group). | en |
dc.type | Article | en |
dc.contributor.department | Department of Radiation Oncology , University Medical Center Utrecht and Princess Maxima Centre for Pediatric Oncology , Utrecht , The Netherlands | en |
dc.identifier.journal | Acta Oncologica | en |
refterms.dateFOA | 2018-12-17T15:26:40Z | |
html.description.abstract | Conventional techniques (3D-CRT) for craniospinal irradiation (CSI) are still widely used. Modern techniques (IMRT, VMAT, TomoTherapy®, proton pencil beam scanning [PBS]) are applied in a limited number of centers. For a 14-year-old patient, we aimed to compare dose distributions of five CSI techniques applied across Europe and generated according to the participating institute protocols, therefore representing daily practice. |