This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Moon DH, Efstathiou JA, Chen RC. What is the best way to radiate the prostate in 2016? Urol Oncol 2017; 35: 59-68. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.06.002MoonDHEfstathiouJAChenRCWhat is the best way to radiate the prostate in 2016?201735596810.1016/j.urolonc.2016.06.00227395453Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Wolff D, Stieler F, Welzel G, Lorenz F, Abo-Madyan Y, Mai S, et al. Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs. serial tomotherapy, step-and-shoot IMRT and 3D-conformal RT for treatment of prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol 2009; 93: 226-33. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2009.08.011WolffDStielerFWelzelGLorenzFAbo-MadyanYMaiSet alVolumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs2009932263310.1016/j.radonc.2009.08.01119765846Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Syed YA, Patel-Yadav AK, Rivers C, Singh AK. Stereotactic radiotherapy for prostate cancer: A review and future directions. World J Clin Oncol 2017; 8: 389-97. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v8.i5.389SyedYAPatel-YadavAKRiversCSinghAKStereotactic radiotherapy for prostate cancer: A review and future directions201783899710.5306/wjco.v8.i5.389563871429067275Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Avkshtol V, Dong Y, Hayes SB, Hallman M, Price R, Sobczak M, et al. A comparison of robotic arm versus gantry linear accelerator stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Res Rep Urol 2016; 8: 145-58. doi: 10.2147/RRU.S58262AvkshtolVDongYHayesSBHallmanMPriceRSobczakMet alA comparison of robotic arm versus gantry linear accelerator stereotactic body radiation therapy for prostate cancer201681455810.2147/RRU.S58262499339727574585Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Seppälä J, Suilamo S, Tenhunen M, Sailas L, Virsunen H, Kaleva E, et al. Dosimetric comparison and evaluation of 4 stereotactic body radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of prostate cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2017; 16: 238-45. doi: 10.1177/1533034616682156SeppäläJSuilamoSTenhunenMSailasLVirsunenHKalevaEet alDosimetric comparison and evaluation of 4 stereotactic body radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of prostate cancer2017162384510.1177/1533034616682156561603728279147Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Chen RC. Radiation therapy for prostate cancer: an evolving treatment modality. Urol Oncol 2019; 37: 579-81. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.05.023ChenRCRadiation therapy for prostate cancer: an evolving treatment modality2019375798110.1016/j.urolonc.2019.05.02331280984Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Katz A. Stereotactic bodyrRadiotherapy for low-risk prostate cancer: a ten-year analysis. Cureus 2017; 9: e1668. doi: 10.7759/cureus.1668KatzAStereotactic bodyrRadiotherapy for low-risk prostate cancer: a ten-year analysis20179e166810.7759/cureus.1668567977329152425Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
McBride SM, Wong DS, Dombrowski JJ, Harkins B, Tapella P, Hanscom H, et al. Hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy in low-risk prostate adenocarcinoma: Preliminary results of a multi-institutional phase 1 feasibility trial. Cancer 2012; 118: 3681-90. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26699McBrideSMWongDSDombrowskiJJHarkinsBTapellaPHanscomHet alHypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy in low-risk prostate adenocarcinoma: Preliminary results of a multi-institutional phase 1 feasibility trial201211836819010.1002/cncr.2669922170628Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
MacDougall ND, Dean C, Muirhead R. Stereotactic body radiotherapy in prostate cancer: is rapidarc a better solution than cyberknife? Clin Oncol 2014; 26: 4-9. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2013.08.008MacDougallNDDeanCMuirheadRStereotactic body radiotherapy in prostate cancer: is rapidarc a better solution than cyberknife?2014264910.1016/j.clon.2013.08.00824071450Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Dong P, Nguyen D, Ruan D, King C, Long T, Romeijn E, et al. Feasibility of prostate robotic radiation therapy on conventional C-arm linacs. Pract Radiat Oncol 2014; 4: 254-60. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2013.10.009DongPNguyenDRuanDKingCLongTRomeijnEet alFeasibility of prostate robotic radiation therapy on conventional C-arm linacs201442546010.1016/j.prro.2013.10.00925012834Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Lin YW, Lin KH, Ho HW, Lin H, Lin L, Lee S, et al. Treatment plan comparison between stereotactic body radiation therapy techniques for prostate cancer: non-isocentric CyberKnife versus isocentric RapidArc. Phys Med 2014; 30: 654-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.03.008LinYWLinKHHoHWLinHLinLLeeSet alTreatment plan comparison between stereotactic body radiation therapy techniques for prostate cancer: non-isocentric CyberKnife versus isocentric RapidArc2014306546110.1016/j.ejmp.2014.03.00824726212Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Quan EM, Li X, Li Y, Wang X, Kudchadker R, Johnsosn J, et al. A comprehensive comparison of IMRT and VMAT plan quality for prostate cancer treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 83: 1169-78. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.09.015QuanEMLiXLiYWangXKudchadkerRJohnsosnJet alA comprehensive comparison of IMRT and VMAT plan quality for prostate cancer treatment20128311697810.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.09.015380583722704703Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Elith CA, Dempsey SE, Warren-Forward HM. A retrospective planning analysis comparing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using two optimization algorithms for the treatment of early-stage prostate cancer. J Med Radiat Sci 2013; 60: 84-92. doi: 10.1002/jmrs.22ElithCADempseySEWarren-ForwardHMA retrospective planning analysis comparing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using two optimization algorithms for the treatment of early-stage prostate cancer201360849210.1002/jmrs.22417580926229615Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
McGarry CK, Butterworth KT, Trainor C, O’Sullivan JM, Prise KM, Hounsell AR. Temporal characterization and in vitro comparison of cell survival following the delivery of 3D-conformal, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Phys Med Biol 2011; 56: 2445-57. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/56/8/008McGarryCKButterworthKTTrainorCO’SullivanJMPriseKMHounsellARTemporal characterization and in vitro comparison of cell survival following the delivery of 3D-conformal, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)20115624455710.1088/0031-9155/56/8/00821427488Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Kopp RW, Duff M, Catalfamo F, Shah D, Rajecki M, Ahmad K. VMAT vs. 7-Field-IMRT: assessing the dosimetric parameters of prostate cancer treatment with a 292-patient sample. Med Dosim 2011; 36: 365-72. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2010.09.004KoppRWDuffMCatalfamoFShahDRajeckiMAhmadKVMAT vs2011363657210.1016/j.meddos.2010.09.00421377863Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Davidson MTM, Blake SJ, Batchelar DL, Cheung P, Mah K. Assessing the role of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) relative to IMRT and helical tomotherapy in the management of localized, locally advanced, and postoperative prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 80: 1550-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.024DavidsonMTMBlakeSJBatchelarDLCheungPMahKAssessing the role of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) relative to IMRT and helical tomotherapy in the management of localized, locally advanced, and postoperative prostate cancer2011801550810.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.10.02421543164Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Salimi M, Shirani K, Abi T, Nedaie H, Hassani H, Gharaati H, et al. Assessment and comparison of homogeneity and conformity indexes in step-and-shoot and compensator-based intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT) in prostate cancer. J Med Signals Sens 2017; 7: 102-7. PMID: 28553583SalimiMShiraniKAbiTNedaieHHassaniHGharaatiHet alAssessment and comparison of homogeneity and conformity indexes in step-and-shoot and compensator-based intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT) in prostate cancer201771027PMID: 2855358310.4103/2228-7477.205502Search in Google Scholar
Fischer-Valuck BW, Rao YJ, Michalski JM. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Transl Androl Urol 2018; 7: 297-307. doi: 10.21037/ tau.2017.12.16Fischer-ValuckBWRaoYJMichalskiJMIntensity-modulated radiotherapy for prostate cancer2018729730710.21037/tau.2017.12.16604375030050791Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Varnava M, Sumida I, Mizuno H, Shiomi H, Suzuki O, Yoshioka Y, et al. A new plan quality objective function for determining optimal collimator combinations in prostate cancer treatment with stereotactic body radiation therapy using CyberKnife. PLoS ONE 2018; 13. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208086VarnavaMSumidaIMizunoHShiomiHSuzukiOYoshiokaYet alA new plan quality objective function for determining optimal collimator combinations in prostate cancer treatment with stereotactic body radiation therapy using CyberKnife20181310.1371/journal.pone.0208086625855930481228Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Scobioala S, Kittel C, Elsayad K, Kroeger K, Oertel M, Samhouri L, et al. A treatment planning study comparing IMRT techniques and cyber knife for stereotactic body radiotherapy of low-risk prostate carcinoma. Radiat Oncol 2019; 14. doi: 10.1186/s13014-019-1353-6ScobioalaSKittelCElsayadKKroegerKOertelMSamhouriLet alA treatment planning study comparing IMRT techniques and cyber knife for stereotactic body radiotherapy of low-risk prostate carcinoma20191410.1186/s13014-019-1353-6668917031399115Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Ceylan C, Kucuk N, Bas Ayata H, Guden M, Engin K. Dosimetric and physical comparison of IMRT and CyberKnife plans in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2010; 15: 181-9. doi: 10.1016/j.rpor.2010.10.003CeylanCKucukNBasAyata HGudenMEnginKDosimetric and physical comparison of IMRT and CyberKnife plans in the treatment of localized prostate cancer201015181910.1016/j.rpor.2010.10.003386315424376947Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
McGuinness CM, Gottschalk AR, Lessard E, Nakamura J, Pinnaduwage D, Pouliot J, et al. Investigating the clinical advantages of a robotic linac equipped with a multileaf collimator in the treatment of brain and prostate cancer patients. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2015; 16: 284-95. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v16i5.5502McGuinnessCMGottschalkARLessardENakamuraJPinnaduwageDPouliotJet alInvestigating the clinical advantages of a robotic linac equipped with a multileaf collimator in the treatment of brain and prostate cancer patients2015162849510.1120/jacmp.v16i5.5502569018226699309Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Menzel HG. The international commission on radiation units and measurements. J ICRU 2010; 10: 1-106. doi: 10.1093/jicru/ndq001MenzelHGThe international commission on radiation units and measurements201010110610.1093/jicru/ndq001Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Park JI, Park JM, Kim J in, Park SY, Ye SJ. Gamma-index method sensitivity for gauging plan delivery accuracy of volumetric modulated arc therapy. Phys Med 2015; 31: 1118-22. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2015.08.005ParkJIParkJMKimJ inParkSYYeSJGamma-index method sensitivity for gauging plan delivery accuracy of volumetric modulated arc therapy20153111182210.1016/j.ejmp.2015.08.00526422199Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Hussein M, Rowshanfarzad P, Ebert MA, Nisbet A, Clark CH. A comparison of the gamma index analysis in various commercial IMRT/VMAT QA systems. Radiother Oncol 2013; 109: 370-6. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2013.08.048HusseinMRowshanfarzadPEbertMANisbetAClarkCHA comparison of the gamma index analysis in various commercial IMRT/VMAT QA systems2013109370610.1016/j.radonc.2013.08.04824100148Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Miften M, Olch A, Mihailidis D, Moran J, Pawlicki T, Molineu A, et al. Tolerance limits and methodologies for IMRT measurement-based verification QA: Recommendations of AAPM Task Group No. 218. Med Phys 2018; 45: e53-83. doi: 10.1002/mp.12810MiftenMOlchAMihailidisDMoranJPawlickiTMolineuAet alTolerance limits and methodologies for IMRT measurement-based verification QA: Recommendations of AAPM Task Group No201845e538310.1002/mp.1281029443390Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
R Core Team - European Environment Agency. R software, version 4.0.3. [2020]. Available at https://github.com/tim-lebedkov/packages/releases/download/2020_10/r-4.0.3-R-4.0.3-win.exeAvailable athttps://github.com/tim-lebedkov/packages/releases/download/2020_10/r-4.0.3-R-4.0.3-win.exeSearch in Google Scholar
Hardcastle N, Tomé WA, Foo K, Miller A, Carolan M, Metcalfe P. Comparison of prostate IMRT and VMAT biologically optimised treatment plans. Med Dosimet 2011; 36: 292-8. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2010.06.001HardcastleNToméWAFooKMillerACarolanMMetcalfePComparison of prostate IMRT and VMAT biologically optimised treatment plans201136292810.1016/j.meddos.2010.06.001299584720801014Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Mellon EA, Javedan K, Strom TJ, Moros E, Biagioli M, Fernandez D, et al. A dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy with step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Pract Radiat Oncol 2015; 5: 11-5. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2014.03.003MellonEAJavedanKStromTJMorosEBiagioliMFernandezDet alA dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy with step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer2015511510.1016/j.prro.2014.03.00325413432Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Gleeson I. A comparison of a moderately hypofractionated IMRT planning technique used in a randomised UK external beam radiotherapy trial with an in-house technique for localised prostate cancer. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2020; 25: 360-6. doi: 10.1016/j.rpor.2020.03.010GleesonIA comparison of a moderately hypofractionated IMRT planning technique used in a randomised UK external beam radiotherapy trial with an in-house technique for localised prostate cancer202025360610.1016/j.rpor.2020.03.010711827632256220Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Kishan AU, King CR. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol 2017; 27: 268-78. doi: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2017.02.006KishanAUKingCRStereotactic body radiotherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer2017272687810.1016/j.semradonc.2017.02.00628577834Open DOISearch in Google Scholar