A comparative study of surface dose and dose distribution for intact breast following irradiation with field-in-field technique vs. the use of conventional wedges

Medical Dosimetry

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 109-114

  De La Torre, Ninet ^a   Figueroa, Carmen T ^a   Martinez, Krystal ^a   Riley, Stacey ^a   Chapman, Jane ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast; Contralateral breast dose; Field in field technique; Uniform dose distribution

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; IRRADIATION; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTION; SKIN SURFACE; THERMOLUMINESCENCE DOSIMETRY;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOTHERAPY, CONFORMAL; RADIOTHERAPY, HIGH-ENERGY; THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETRY;

EID: 2942579793     PISSN: 09583947     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2004.03.002     Document Type: Article

References (6)

1. Brooks P.S. Dose to contralateral breast A comparative study. Med. Dosim. 20:1995;301-307
2. Warlick W.B., O'Rear J.H., Earley L., et al. Dose to the contralateral breast: A comparison of two techniques using the enhanced dynamic wedge versus a standard wedge. Med. Dosim. 22:1997;185-191
3. Spicer, C.; Brooks, B.; Kirsner, S. Multi-segmented intensity modulated field-in-field irradiation. Department of Radiation Physics, Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center. pp 1-7; 2001
4. Rando Phantom, The Phantom Laboratory, Salem, N.Y., 2002
5. Troncalli A., Chapman J. TLD linearity vs. beam energy and modality. Med. Dosim. 27:2002;295-296
6. Yaparpalvi R., Fontenla D.P., Yu L., Lai P.P., Vikram B. Radiaton therapy of breast carcinoma Confirmation of prescription dose using diodes. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 35:1996;173-183