Fluence smoothing evaluation for whole‐breast automatically generated treatment plans
Purpose This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Material and methods We conducted automated treatment planning for 60 breast cancer patients using the Eclipse Script...
Uloženo v:
| Vydáno v: | Journal of applied clinical medical physics Ročník 26; číslo 2; s. e14564 - n/a |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autoři: | , , , , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Vydáno: |
United States
John Wiley & Sons, Inc
01.02.2025
John Wiley and Sons Inc |
| Témata: | |
| ISSN: | 1526-9914, 1526-9914 |
| On-line přístup: | Získat plný text |
| Tagy: |
Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
|
| Abstract | Purpose
This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).
Material and methods
We conducted automated treatment planning for 60 breast cancer patients using the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface. The plans included four‐field IMRT, emphasizing smoothing weight combinations while maintaining a 4:3 aspect ratio between the X and Y directions. Four weight sets (40 × 30, 100 × 75, 150 × 115.2, and 200 × 150) were tested, resulting in four plans per patient. A total dose of 40.05 Gy over 15 fractions was prescribed. Optimization weigths were dynamically adjusted based on dosimetric evaluations, with the maximum coverage priority set at 200. Statistical analyses were used to assess the dosimetric data.
Results
The median planning target volume (PTV) coverage varied across smoothing levels, with default smoothing (40 × 30) providing superior median PTV coverage. Lung constraints showed significant differences mainly at higher smoothing levels. Heart constraints exhibited less variation between smoothing levels, with significant differences primarily in the maximum and mean doses for right‐sided patients and between default and higher smoothing levels for left‐sided patients. No significant differences were observed in contralateral breast constraints among all smoothing levels, except at the maximum level for right‐sided patients. Monitor units decreased with increasing smoothing weight, showing significant differences between default and other settings. For right‐sided patients, the median number of monitor units varied from 1346 (40 × 30) to 754 (200 × 150), and for left‐sided patients, from 1333 (40 × 30) to 804 (200 × 150). Chi‐square tests revealed differences in dose constraint adherence between default and maximum smoothing levels, particularly in target coverage.
Conclusion
Our findings suggest that using a ratio of smoothing weights to target priorities between 1:1.5 and 1:1.6 leads to a favorable balance between complexity and dosimetric plan quality, with no significant impacts on dose constraint adherence. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).
We conducted automated treatment planning for 60 breast cancer patients using the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface. The plans included four-field IMRT, emphasizing smoothing weight combinations while maintaining a 4:3 aspect ratio between the X and Y directions. Four weight sets (40 × 30, 100 × 75, 150 × 115.2, and 200 × 150) were tested, resulting in four plans per patient. A total dose of 40.05 Gy over 15 fractions was prescribed. Optimization weigths were dynamically adjusted based on dosimetric evaluations, with the maximum coverage priority set at 200. Statistical analyses were used to assess the dosimetric data.
The median planning target volume (PTV) coverage varied across smoothing levels, with default smoothing (40 × 30) providing superior median PTV coverage. Lung constraints showed significant differences mainly at higher smoothing levels. Heart constraints exhibited less variation between smoothing levels, with significant differences primarily in the maximum and mean doses for right-sided patients and between default and higher smoothing levels for left-sided patients. No significant differences were observed in contralateral breast constraints among all smoothing levels, except at the maximum level for right-sided patients. Monitor units decreased with increasing smoothing weight, showing significant differences between default and other settings. For right-sided patients, the median number of monitor units varied from 1346 (40 × 30) to 754 (200 × 150), and for left-sided patients, from 1333 (40 × 30) to 804 (200 × 150). Chi-square tests revealed differences in dose constraint adherence between default and maximum smoothing levels, particularly in target coverage.
Our findings suggest that using a ratio of smoothing weights to target priorities between 1:1.5 and 1:1.6 leads to a favorable balance between complexity and dosimetric plan quality, with no significant impacts on dose constraint adherence. Purpose This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Material and methods We conducted automated treatment planning for 60 breast cancer patients using the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface. The plans included four‐field IMRT, emphasizing smoothing weight combinations while maintaining a 4:3 aspect ratio between the X and Y directions. Four weight sets (40 × 30, 100 × 75, 150 × 115.2, and 200 × 150) were tested, resulting in four plans per patient. A total dose of 40.05 Gy over 15 fractions was prescribed. Optimization weigths were dynamically adjusted based on dosimetric evaluations, with the maximum coverage priority set at 200. Statistical analyses were used to assess the dosimetric data. Results The median planning target volume (PTV) coverage varied across smoothing levels, with default smoothing (40 × 30) providing superior median PTV coverage. Lung constraints showed significant differences mainly at higher smoothing levels. Heart constraints exhibited less variation between smoothing levels, with significant differences primarily in the maximum and mean doses for right‐sided patients and between default and higher smoothing levels for left‐sided patients. No significant differences were observed in contralateral breast constraints among all smoothing levels, except at the maximum level for right‐sided patients. Monitor units decreased with increasing smoothing weight, showing significant differences between default and other settings. For right‐sided patients, the median number of monitor units varied from 1346 (40 × 30) to 754 (200 × 150), and for left‐sided patients, from 1333 (40 × 30) to 804 (200 × 150). Chi‐square tests revealed differences in dose constraint adherence between default and maximum smoothing levels, particularly in target coverage. Conclusion Our findings suggest that using a ratio of smoothing weights to target priorities between 1:1.5 and 1:1.6 leads to a favorable balance between complexity and dosimetric plan quality, with no significant impacts on dose constraint adherence. Purpose This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Material and methods We conducted automated treatment planning for 60 breast cancer patients using the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface. The plans included four‐field IMRT, emphasizing smoothing weight combinations while maintaining a 4:3 aspect ratio between the X and Y directions. Four weight sets (40 × 30, 100 × 75, 150 × 115.2, and 200 × 150) were tested, resulting in four plans per patient. A total dose of 40.05 Gy over 15 fractions was prescribed. Optimization weigths were dynamically adjusted based on dosimetric evaluations, with the maximum coverage priority set at 200. Statistical analyses were used to assess the dosimetric data. Results The median planning target volume (PTV) coverage varied across smoothing levels, with default smoothing (40 × 30) providing superior median PTV coverage. Lung constraints showed significant differences mainly at higher smoothing levels. Heart constraints exhibited less variation between smoothing levels, with significant differences primarily in the maximum and mean doses for right‐sided patients and between default and higher smoothing levels for left‐sided patients. No significant differences were observed in contralateral breast constraints among all smoothing levels, except at the maximum level for right‐sided patients. Monitor units decreased with increasing smoothing weight, showing significant differences between default and other settings. For right‐sided patients, the median number of monitor units varied from 1346 (40 × 30) to 754 (200 × 150), and for left‐sided patients, from 1333 (40 × 30) to 804 (200 × 150). Chi‐square tests revealed differences in dose constraint adherence between default and maximum smoothing levels, particularly in target coverage. Conclusion Our findings suggest that using a ratio of smoothing weights to target priorities between 1:1.5 and 1:1.6 leads to a favorable balance between complexity and dosimetric plan quality, with no significant impacts on dose constraint adherence. This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).PURPOSEThis study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).We conducted automated treatment planning for 60 breast cancer patients using the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface. The plans included four-field IMRT, emphasizing smoothing weight combinations while maintaining a 4:3 aspect ratio between the X and Y directions. Four weight sets (40 × 30, 100 × 75, 150 × 115.2, and 200 × 150) were tested, resulting in four plans per patient. A total dose of 40.05 Gy over 15 fractions was prescribed. Optimization weigths were dynamically adjusted based on dosimetric evaluations, with the maximum coverage priority set at 200. Statistical analyses were used to assess the dosimetric data.MATERIAL AND METHODSWe conducted automated treatment planning for 60 breast cancer patients using the Eclipse Scripting Application Programming Interface. The plans included four-field IMRT, emphasizing smoothing weight combinations while maintaining a 4:3 aspect ratio between the X and Y directions. Four weight sets (40 × 30, 100 × 75, 150 × 115.2, and 200 × 150) were tested, resulting in four plans per patient. A total dose of 40.05 Gy over 15 fractions was prescribed. Optimization weigths were dynamically adjusted based on dosimetric evaluations, with the maximum coverage priority set at 200. Statistical analyses were used to assess the dosimetric data.The median planning target volume (PTV) coverage varied across smoothing levels, with default smoothing (40 × 30) providing superior median PTV coverage. Lung constraints showed significant differences mainly at higher smoothing levels. Heart constraints exhibited less variation between smoothing levels, with significant differences primarily in the maximum and mean doses for right-sided patients and between default and higher smoothing levels for left-sided patients. No significant differences were observed in contralateral breast constraints among all smoothing levels, except at the maximum level for right-sided patients. Monitor units decreased with increasing smoothing weight, showing significant differences between default and other settings. For right-sided patients, the median number of monitor units varied from 1346 (40 × 30) to 754 (200 × 150), and for left-sided patients, from 1333 (40 × 30) to 804 (200 × 150). Chi-square tests revealed differences in dose constraint adherence between default and maximum smoothing levels, particularly in target coverage.RESULTSThe median planning target volume (PTV) coverage varied across smoothing levels, with default smoothing (40 × 30) providing superior median PTV coverage. Lung constraints showed significant differences mainly at higher smoothing levels. Heart constraints exhibited less variation between smoothing levels, with significant differences primarily in the maximum and mean doses for right-sided patients and between default and higher smoothing levels for left-sided patients. No significant differences were observed in contralateral breast constraints among all smoothing levels, except at the maximum level for right-sided patients. Monitor units decreased with increasing smoothing weight, showing significant differences between default and other settings. For right-sided patients, the median number of monitor units varied from 1346 (40 × 30) to 754 (200 × 150), and for left-sided patients, from 1333 (40 × 30) to 804 (200 × 150). Chi-square tests revealed differences in dose constraint adherence between default and maximum smoothing levels, particularly in target coverage.Our findings suggest that using a ratio of smoothing weights to target priorities between 1:1.5 and 1:1.6 leads to a favorable balance between complexity and dosimetric plan quality, with no significant impacts on dose constraint adherence.CONCLUSIONOur findings suggest that using a ratio of smoothing weights to target priorities between 1:1.5 and 1:1.6 leads to a favorable balance between complexity and dosimetric plan quality, with no significant impacts on dose constraint adherence. |
| Author | Oliveira e Silva, Luis Felipe Zaratim, Giulianne Rivelli R. Mendes, Cristiano Jacques M. R. dos Reis, Ricardo G. Gomes, Marília Miranda F. |
| AuthorAffiliation | 3 Department of Radiation Oncology University Hospital of Brasília Brasília Federal District Brazil 1 Department of Biomedical Engineering University of Brasilia Brasília Brazil 2 CONFIAR Radiotherapy Goiânia Goiás Brazil |
| AuthorAffiliation_xml | – name: 3 Department of Radiation Oncology University Hospital of Brasília Brasília Federal District Brazil – name: 2 CONFIAR Radiotherapy Goiânia Goiás Brazil – name: 1 Department of Biomedical Engineering University of Brasilia Brasília Brazil |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Giulianne Rivelli R. orcidid: 0009-0007-4217-0437 surname: Zaratim fullname: Zaratim, Giulianne Rivelli R. email: giuliannerivelli@gmail.com organization: CONFIAR Radiotherapy – sequence: 2 givenname: Luis Felipe orcidid: 0009-0002-6453-9403 surname: Oliveira e Silva fullname: Oliveira e Silva, Luis Felipe organization: University Hospital of Brasília – sequence: 3 givenname: Ricardo G. orcidid: 0000-0003-4266-7690 surname: dos Reis fullname: dos Reis, Ricardo G. organization: University Hospital of Brasília – sequence: 4 givenname: Cristiano Jacques M. R. orcidid: 0000-0002-7605-6305 surname: Mendes fullname: Mendes, Cristiano Jacques M. R. organization: University of Brasilia – sequence: 5 givenname: Marília Miranda F. orcidid: 0000-0001-8584-9676 surname: Gomes fullname: Gomes, Marília Miranda F. organization: University of Brasilia |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39611818$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNp9kcFO3DAURa0KVGDaTT-gitQNqjTgFztOskJoVNpKIDZUXVq28zIT5NhT2wHNrp_Qb-yX1NMBRFl05Sfd46v73j0ie847JOQd0BOgtDxVZixPgFeCvyKHUJVi3rbA957NB-QoxltKARrWvCYHrBV5hOaQfL-wEzqDRRy9T6vBLQu8U3ZSafCu6H0o7lfe4u-fv3RAFVOhpuTHrBpl7aZYosOgEnZFynIa0aVibZWLb8h-r2zEtw_vjHy7-HSz-DK_vP78dXF-OTe8rvhc1JRXrG4FdrzvK9ZpUwpRaV2pHnSFndJQCmwYL7WoGXSIhtUaemag6YCyGTnb-a4nPWJncoCgrFyHYVRhI70a5L-KG1Zy6e8kQN3m02wdjh8cgv8xYUxyHKJBm7dAP0XJgHEqWkF5Rj-8QG_9FFzeL1OCiZbRHHJG3j-P9JTl8egZ-LgDTPAxBuyfEKBy26jcNir_Npph2MH3g8XNf0h5vrgqd3_-ALtXpKM |
| Cites_doi | 10.1118/1.3276775 10.1118/1.4762566 10.1038/s41592‐019‐0686‐2 10.1002/acm2.14361 10.1093/jicru/ndq001 10.7150/jca.26044 10.1002/acm2.12168 10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4530 10.1016/j.meddos.2023.08.009 10.1118/1.4915286 10.4103/jmp.jmp_81_22 10.1088/1361‐6560/acbefe 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.01.027 10.3389/fonc.2023.993809 10.1016/j.phro.2018.02.002 10.29384/rbfm.2023.v17.19849001720 10.1120/jacmp.v15i6.4957 10.1007/s12194‐016‐0349‐2 10.1118/1.2896083 10.1118/1.4861821 10.1111/ajco.13624 10.1016/S0360‐3016(03)00073‐7 10.1120/jacmp.v11i2.3035 10.1016/S0167‐8140(19)30551‐1 10.1118/1.2349696 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.07.032 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.11.034 10.1118/1.2409749 10.1016/j.radonc.2005.08.003 10.1016/S1120‐1797(22)00171‐5 10.1002/pro6.1207 10.1038/s41598‐023‐48331‐x 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.09.003 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | 2024 The Author(s). published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. 2025. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the "License"). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: 2024 The Author(s). published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. – notice: 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. – notice: 2025. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the "License"). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
| DBID | 24P AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 7X7 7XB 88I 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA AZQEC BENPR CCPQU DWQXO FYUFA GHDGH GNUQQ HCIFZ K9. M0S M2P PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS Q9U 7X8 5PM |
| DOI | 10.1002/acm2.14564 |
| DatabaseName | Wiley Online Library Open Access CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Science Database (Alumni Edition) Hospital Premium Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central Essentials - QC ProQuest Central ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Central Korea Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Central Student SciTech Premium Collection ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Collection Science Database (ProQuest) ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic (retired) ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central Basic MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest Central Student ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) SciTech Premium Collection ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection Health Research Premium Collection Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Korea ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Science Journals (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Basic ProQuest Science Journals ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE Publicly Available Content Database MEDLINE - Academic |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: 24P name: Wiley Online Library Open Access (LUT) url: https://authorservices.wiley.com/open-science/open-access/browse-journals.html sourceTypes: Publisher – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: PIMPY name: Publicly Available Content Database url: http://search.proquest.com/publiccontent sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| DocumentTitleAlternate | ZARATIM et al |
| EISSN | 1526-9914 |
| EndPage | n/a |
| ExternalDocumentID | PMC11799910 39611818 10_1002_acm2_14564 ACM214564 |
| Genre | article Journal Article |
| GeographicLocations | United States--US |
| GeographicLocations_xml | – name: United States--US |
| GroupedDBID | 0R~ 1OC 24P 29J 2WC 53G 5GY 7X7 88I 8FI 8FJ AAHHS ABUWG ACCFJ ACCMX ACGFO ACXQS ADBBV ADKYN ADPDF ADZMN ADZOD AEEZP AENEX AEQDE AFKRA AIWBW AJBDE ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN AOIJS AVUZU AZQEC BAWUL BCNDV BENPR BPHCQ BVXVI CCPQU CS3 DIK DU5 DWQXO E3Z EBS EJD EMOBN FRP FYUFA GNUQQ GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 H13 HCIFZ HMCUK HYE IAO IHR INH ITC KWQ M2P M~E OK1 OVD OVEED P6G PIMPY PQQKQ PROAC RNS RPM TR2 UKHRP W2D WIN XSB AAMMB AAYXX AEFGJ AFFHD AGXDD AIDQK AIDYY CITATION OVT PHGZM PHGZT CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 7XB 8FK K9. PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQUKI PRINS Q9U 7X8 PUEGO 5PM |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c4754-670453796ed4ff53dbc2665bb5af1b5edab126e8342b6731deec37b1f3c18d103 |
| IEDL.DBID | M2P |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 0 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=001366439200001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1526-9914 |
| IngestDate | Tue Nov 04 02:05:10 EST 2025 Thu Oct 02 12:03:13 EDT 2025 Tue Oct 07 07:26:12 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 06:04:16 EDT 2025 Sat Nov 29 08:03:44 EST 2025 Thu Feb 06 09:47:08 EST 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 2 |
| Keywords | complexity breast cancer fluence smoothing IMRT automated treatment planning |
| Language | English |
| License | Attribution 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4754-670453796ed4ff53dbc2665bb5af1b5edab126e8342b6731deec37b1f3c18d103 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
| ORCID | 0009-0007-4217-0437 0000-0002-7605-6305 0000-0001-8584-9676 0009-0002-6453-9403 0000-0003-4266-7690 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://www.proquest.com/docview/3163693067?pq-origsite=%requestingapplication% |
| PMID | 39611818 |
| PQID | 3163693067 |
| PQPubID | 4370306 |
| PageCount | 11 |
| ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11799910 proquest_miscellaneous_3134069604 proquest_journals_3163693067 pubmed_primary_39611818 crossref_primary_10_1002_acm2_14564 wiley_primary_10_1002_acm2_14564_ACM214564 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | February 2025 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2025-02-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 02 year: 2025 text: February 2025 |
| PublicationDecade | 2020 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States – name: Malden Massachusetts – name: Hoboken |
| PublicationTitle | Journal of applied clinical medical physics |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | J Appl Clin Med Phys |
| PublicationYear | 2025 |
| Publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc John Wiley and Sons Inc |
| Publisher_xml | – name: John Wiley & Sons, Inc – name: John Wiley and Sons Inc |
| References | 2010; 11 2010; 10 2023; 13 2010; 37 2023; 17 2011 2006; 33 2023; 7 2009 2020; 17 2020; 106 2022; 47 2008; 35 2011; 79 2012; 39 2014; 41 2007; 34 2021; 92 2003; 56 2018; 9 2023; 68 2018; 5 2006; 65 2020 2015; 42 2014; 15 2005; 76 2017; 18 2024; 25 2024; 49 2007; 67 2016; 9 2022; 18 e_1_2_10_23_1 e_1_2_10_24_1 e_1_2_10_21_1 e_1_2_10_22_1 e_1_2_10_20_1 e_1_2_10_2_1 e_1_2_10_4_1 e_1_2_10_18_1 e_1_2_10_3_1 e_1_2_10_19_1 e_1_2_10_6_1 e_1_2_10_16_1 e_1_2_10_5_1 e_1_2_10_17_1 e_1_2_10_8_1 e_1_2_10_14_1 e_1_2_10_37_1 e_1_2_10_7_1 e_1_2_10_15_1 e_1_2_10_36_1 e_1_2_10_12_1 e_1_2_10_35_1 e_1_2_10_9_1 e_1_2_10_13_1 e_1_2_10_34_1 e_1_2_10_10_1 e_1_2_10_33_1 e_1_2_10_11_1 e_1_2_10_32_1 e_1_2_10_31_1 e_1_2_10_30_1 e_1_2_10_29_1 e_1_2_10_27_1 e_1_2_10_28_1 e_1_2_10_25_1 e_1_2_10_26_1 |
| References_xml | – year: 2011 – volume: 9 start-page: 202 issue: 2 year: 2016 end-page: 213 article-title: Effect of fluence smoothing on the quality of intensity‐modulated radiation treatment plans publication-title: Radiol Phys Technol – year: 2009 – volume: 92 start-page: S81 year: 2021 end-page: S81 article-title: Bias‐free comparison of VMAT and IMRT strategies for left‐sided whole breast irradiation using automated planning publication-title: Phys Med – volume: 5 start-page: 37 year: 2018 end-page: 43 article-title: Comparison of complexity metrics for multi‐institutional evaluations of treatment plans in radiotherapy publication-title: Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol – volume: 39 start-page: 7160 issue: 11 year: 2012 end-page: 7170 article-title: Penalization of aperture complexity in inversely planned volumetric modulated arc therapy publication-title: Med Phys – volume: 15 start-page: 213 issue: 1 year: 2014 end-page: 225 article-title: A bias‐free, automated planning tool for technique comparison in radiotherapy—application to nasopharyngeal carcinoma treatments publication-title: J Appl Clin Med Phys – volume: 18 start-page: e263 issue: 5 year: 2022 end-page: e267 article-title: Comparison between flattening filter‐free (FFF) and flattened photon beam VMAT plans for the whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with hippocampus sparing publication-title: Asia Pac J Clin Oncol – volume: 67 start-page: 1596 issue: 5 year: 2007 end-page: 1605 article-title: The tradeoff between treatment plan quality and required number of monitor units in intensity‐modulated radiotherapy publication-title: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys – volume: 18 start-page: 307 issue: 5 year: 2017 end-page: 314 article-title: Volumetric‐modulated arc therapy and intensity‐modulated radiation therapy treatment planning for prostate cancer with flattened beam and flattening filter free linear accelerators publication-title: J Appl Clin Med Phys – volume: 13 issue: 1 year: 2023 article-title: Evaluation of complexity and deliverability of IMRT treatment plans for breast cancer publication-title: Sci Rep – volume: 68 issue: 6 year: 2023 article-title: Built‐in wavelet‐induced smoothness to reduce plan complexity in intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) publication-title: Phys Med Biol – volume: 13 year: 2023 article-title: Volumetric modulated arc therapy for hippocampal‐sparing prophylactic cranial irradiation: planning comparison of Halcyon and C‐arm accelerators publication-title: Front Oncol – volume: 42 start-page: 1858 issue: 4 year: 2015 end-page: 1870 article-title: Dose domain regularization of MLC leaf patterns for highly complex IMRT plans publication-title: Med Phys – volume: 35 start-page: 1926 issue: 5 year: 2008 end-page: 1931 article-title: Management of the interplay effect when using dynamic MLC sequences to treat moving targets publication-title: Med Phys – volume: 25 issue: 5 year: 2024 article-title: Automated treatment planning for whole breast irradiation with individualized tangential IMRT fields publication-title: J Appl Clin Med Phys – volume: 11 start-page: 33 issue: 2 year: 2010 end-page: 61 article-title: Evaluation of fluence‐smoothing feature for three IMRT planning systems publication-title: J Appl Clin Med Phys – volume: 17 start-page: 720 year: 2023 article-title: Automation of tangent fields determination in breast radiotherapy: development and comparison of two algorithms publication-title: Rev Brasil Física Méd – volume: 37 start-page: 505 issue: 2 year: 2010 end-page: 515 article-title: A new metric for assessing IMRT modulation complexity and plan deliverability publication-title: Med Phys – volume: 49 start-page: 81 issue: 2 year: 2024 end-page: 84 article-title: Efficient constancy evaluation of the Eclipse treatment planning system's photon and electron dose calculation algorithms aided by the third‐party ClearCheck software publication-title: Med Dosimetry – volume: 47 start-page: 336 issue: 4 year: 2022 end-page: 343 article-title: Does fluence smoothing reduce the complexity of the intensity‐modulated radiation therapy treatment plan? A dosimetric analysis publication-title: J Med Phys – volume: 33 start-page: 3874 issue: 10 year: 2006 end-page: 3900 article-title: The management of respiratory motion in radiation oncology report of AAPM Task Group 76 publication-title: Med Phys – volume: 79 start-page: 1557 issue: 5 year: 2011 end-page: 1564 article-title: Effects of setup errors and shape changes on breast radiotherapy publication-title: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys – volume: 15 start-page: 147 issue: 6 year: 2014 end-page: 159 article-title: Surface imaging‐based analysis of intrafraction motion for breast radiotherapy patients publication-title: J Appl Clin Med Phys – year: 2020 – volume: 76 start-page: 354 issue: 3 year: 2005 end-page: 361 article-title: IMRT treatment planning—A comparative inter‐system and inter‐centre planning exercise of the QUASIMODO group publication-title: Radiotherapy and Oncology – volume: 106 start-page: 182 issue: 1 year: 2020 end-page: 184 article-title: Complexity in radiation therapy: it's complicated publication-title: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys – article-title: Using automated planning for “bias‐free” plan comparison publication-title: Radiother Oncol – volume: 17 start-page: 261 issue: 3 year: 2020 end-page: 272 article-title: SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python publication-title: Nat Methods – volume: 41 issue: 2 year: 2014 article-title: Quantification of beam complexity in intensity‐modulated radiation therapy treatment plans publication-title: Med Phys – volume: 56 start-page: 83 issue: 1 year: 2003 end-page: 88 article-title: Radiation‐induced second cancers: the impact of 3D‐CRT and IMRT publication-title: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys – volume: 34 start-page: 507 issue: 2 year: 2007 end-page: 520 article-title: Reduction of IMRT beam complexity through the use of beam modulation penalties in the objective function publication-title: Med Phys – volume: 7 start-page: 197 issue: 3 year: 2023 end-page: 206 article-title: Dosimetric and radiobiological impact of flattening filter‐free beam and dose calculation algorithm using RapidArc plans for cervical cancer treatment publication-title: Precis Radiat Oncol – volume: 10 start-page: 1 issue: 1 year: 2010 end-page: 106 article-title: Prescribing, recording, and reporting photon‐beam intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) publication-title: J ICRU – volume: 9 start-page: 3263 issue: 18 year: 2018 end-page: 3268 article-title: Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam publication-title: J Cancer – volume: 65 start-page: 1 year: 2006 end-page: 7 article-title: Intensity‐modulated radiation therapy, protons, and the risk of second cancers publication-title: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys – ident: e_1_2_10_28_1 doi: 10.1118/1.3276775 – ident: e_1_2_10_13_1 – ident: e_1_2_10_34_1 doi: 10.1118/1.4762566 – ident: e_1_2_10_14_1 doi: 10.1038/s41592‐019‐0686‐2 – ident: e_1_2_10_12_1 doi: 10.1002/acm2.14361 – ident: e_1_2_10_2_1 doi: 10.1093/jicru/ndq001 – ident: e_1_2_10_10_1 – ident: e_1_2_10_22_1 doi: 10.7150/jca.26044 – ident: e_1_2_10_23_1 doi: 10.1002/acm2.12168 – ident: e_1_2_10_8_1 doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4530 – ident: e_1_2_10_15_1 doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2023.08.009 – ident: e_1_2_10_35_1 doi: 10.1118/1.4915286 – ident: e_1_2_10_36_1 doi: 10.4103/jmp.jmp_81_22 – ident: e_1_2_10_3_1 doi: 10.1088/1361‐6560/acbefe – ident: e_1_2_10_32_1 doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.01.027 – ident: e_1_2_10_24_1 doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.993809 – ident: e_1_2_10_30_1 doi: 10.1016/j.phro.2018.02.002 – ident: e_1_2_10_11_1 doi: 10.29384/rbfm.2023.v17.19849001720 – ident: e_1_2_10_19_1 doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v15i6.4957 – ident: e_1_2_10_37_1 doi: 10.1007/s12194‐016‐0349‐2 – ident: e_1_2_10_16_1 doi: 10.1118/1.2896083 – ident: e_1_2_10_29_1 doi: 10.1118/1.4861821 – ident: e_1_2_10_9_1 – ident: e_1_2_10_25_1 doi: 10.1111/ajco.13624 – ident: e_1_2_10_33_1 doi: 10.1016/S0360‐3016(03)00073‐7 – ident: e_1_2_10_5_1 doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v11i2.3035 – ident: e_1_2_10_7_1 doi: 10.1016/S0167‐8140(19)30551‐1 – ident: e_1_2_10_17_1 doi: 10.1118/1.2349696 – ident: e_1_2_10_18_1 doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.07.032 – ident: e_1_2_10_20_1 doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.11.034 – ident: e_1_2_10_27_1 doi: 10.1118/1.2409749 – ident: e_1_2_10_4_1 doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2005.08.003 – ident: e_1_2_10_6_1 doi: 10.1016/S1120‐1797(22)00171‐5 – ident: e_1_2_10_21_1 doi: 10.1002/pro6.1207 – ident: e_1_2_10_31_1 doi: 10.1038/s41598‐023‐48331‐x – ident: e_1_2_10_26_1 doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.09.003 |
| SSID | ssj0011838 |
| Score | 2.356888 |
| Snippet | Purpose
This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity‐modulated... This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity-modulated radiation... Purpose This study aimed to identify the fluence smoothing threshold that preserves the dosimetric quality of planning for breast cancer intensity‐modulated... |
| SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref wiley |
| SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Publisher |
| StartPage | e14564 |
| SubjectTerms | Algorithms automated treatment planning Automation Breast cancer Breast Neoplasms - radiotherapy Cancer therapies complexity Dosimetry Female fluence smoothing Heart Humans IMRT Optimization Organs at Risk - radiation effects Patients Planning RADIATION ONCOLOGY PHYSICS Radiation therapy Radiotherapy Dosage Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted - methods Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated - methods Software |
| SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: Wiley Online Library Open Access dbid: 24P link: http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1LSxxBEC6MCcGL5u1EEzroSRic7p5-LOQi4pJDFA8JehumX1FYZ8XdVbz5E_yN_hKre3ZnXYRAyG2gu2eaekx9M131FcC2MdJpZUPuuA55KYqQG1uIHD_iuNKBO0pTofBPdXSkT097x0vwfVYL0_JDdD_comek93V08NqMduekobW9YOjnQpYv4CWlXEWbZuVxd4aAxpoK4QSTOaKgsiMnZbvztYvh6BnGfJ4q-RTCphjUX_u_3b-B1Sn2JHutsbyFJd-8g9eH09P193DSb_uVkNHFEBWIQY3MycAJoltyE7vpPtzdm5jKPib1ZDxMlK_1YHBL_iQGa0SwpMteJ5cDDIUf4Hf_4Nf-j3zaeCG3pRJlLhUCPRSo9K4MQXBnLMZxYYyoAzXCu9pQJr3mJTNSceq8t1wZGril2tGCf4TlZtj4dSCsMKynZbCRZ115qq2KoM3hIuuMKDLYmsm_umz5NaqWSZlVUUZVklEGmzPVVFMfG1UcoWRs5ChVBt-6YfSOeORRN344iXN4LO2VBd7iU6vJ7jG8J2PVrc5AL-i4mxCZtxdHmvOzxMCdePQQaGWwk5T8l61Xe_uHLF19_pfJG7DCYqfhlB--Ccvjq4n_Aq_s9fh8dPU1Gfoj6b8Cfg priority: 102 providerName: Wiley-Blackwell |
| Title | Fluence smoothing evaluation for whole‐breast automatically generated treatment plans |
| URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002%2Facm2.14564 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39611818 https://www.proquest.com/docview/3163693067 https://www.proquest.com/docview/3134069604 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC11799910 |
| Volume | 26 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos001366439200001&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVAON databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals (ODIN) customDbUrl: eissn: 1526-9914 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0011838 issn: 1526-9914 databaseCode: DOA dateStart: 20000101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.doaj.org/ providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – providerCode: PRVHPJ databaseName: ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources customDbUrl: eissn: 1526-9914 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0011838 issn: 1526-9914 databaseCode: M~E dateStart: 20000101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://road.issn.org providerName: ISSN International Centre – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Health & Medical Collection customDbUrl: eissn: 1526-9914 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0011838 issn: 1526-9914 databaseCode: 7X7 dateStart: 20000301 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/healthcomplete providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: ProQuest Central customDbUrl: eissn: 1526-9914 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0011838 issn: 1526-9914 databaseCode: BENPR dateStart: 20000301 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.proquest.com/central providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Publicly Available Content Database customDbUrl: eissn: 1526-9914 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0011838 issn: 1526-9914 databaseCode: PIMPY dateStart: 20000301 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: http://search.proquest.com/publiccontent providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVPQU databaseName: Science Database (ProQuest) customDbUrl: eissn: 1526-9914 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0011838 issn: 1526-9914 databaseCode: M2P dateStart: 20000301 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://search.proquest.com/sciencejournals providerName: ProQuest – providerCode: PRVWIB databaseName: Wiley Online Library Free Content customDbUrl: eissn: 1526-9914 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0011838 issn: 1526-9914 databaseCode: WIN dateStart: 20000101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com providerName: Wiley-Blackwell – providerCode: PRVWIB databaseName: Wiley Online Library Open Access (LUT) customDbUrl: eissn: 1526-9914 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0011838 issn: 1526-9914 databaseCode: 24P dateStart: 20000101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://authorservices.wiley.com/open-science/open-access/browse-journals.html providerName: Wiley-Blackwell |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3NbtQwEB7RFiEu_EMDZWUEJ6SosZ3Y3hMqVVdUYlcRAnU5RfFPSqVtsu3ugrjxCDwjT8LYyaasKvXCxUpiJ3E8tueLZ_wNwButhVXSVLHlqorTLKlibZIsxp84LlXFLaVho_BHOZmo6XSYdwtui86tcj0nhonaNsavke9zBA4-bJ-Q7-YXsY8a5a2rXQiNLdhBZEO9S9eY5b0VAbur6ilJ2X5pzhnODJlIN5XQNWR53UHyX-AaNM_o_v_W-QHc6zAnOWg7yUO45epHcGfcWdUfw8mojVNCFucNCg6VGbkiASeIaskPH0X3z6_f2ruwL0m5WjaB6rWczX6S08BcjciV9F7rZD5DFfgEvoyOPh9-iLuAC7FJZZbGQiLA43IonE2rKuNWG9TfmdZZWVGdOVtqyoRTPGVaSE6tc4ZLTStuqLI04U9hu25qtwuEJZoNlaiM51eXjiojPVizeJOxOksieL2WQDFveTWKlkGZFV5ORZBTBHvrhi26sbUorlo1gld9No4Kb-ooa9esfBnut_SKBB_xrJVl_xo-FH63rYpAbUi5L-AZtzdz6rNvgXk78OchwIrgbegQN1S9ODgcs3D0_OaPeAF3mY8pHDzB92B7eblyL-G2-b48W1wOYIulOaZyKkOqBrDz_miSfxqE1YNB6PB4LT8e51_x7OR48henSgrN |
| linkProvider | ProQuest |
| linkToHtml | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V3NbtQwEB6VgoAL_5RAASPgghQ1tuOfPSBUFVaturvqoYjeQvxHK22TpbtL1RuPwJPwUDwJtrNJWVXqrQdukew4cWbG8zme-QbgjVLcSKFdaqh0ac4ylyqdsdRv4qiQjhqMY6LwQIxG8uCgt7cCv9tcmBBW2a6JcaE2tQ7_yDeoBw6hbB8XHybf01A1KpyutiU0GrXYtWenfss2fb_z0cv3LSH9T_tb2-miqkCqc8HylAuPYqjocWty5xg1SnsnxZRipcOKWVMqTLiVNCeKC4qNtZoKhR3VWBqcUT_uNbieB2axECpI9rpTC28esqNAJRulPiZ-JWI8X3Z6F5DsxYDMf4Fy9HT9u__bN7oHdxaYGm02RnAfVmz1AG4OF1EDD-FLv6nDgqbHtVdM76zROck58qgdnYYqwX9-_lIhRH-GyvmsjlS25Xh8hr5FZm6PzFEXlY8mY-_iH8HnK5nWY1it6so-AUQyRXqSOx3444XFUosARo2_SRvFsgRetxIvJg1vSNEwRJMi6EUR9SKB9VaQxWLtmBbnUkzgVdfsrT4c5ZSVreehDw0pyzzzQ6w1utM9hvZ4yCaWCcglreo6BEbx5Zbq6DAyi0d-QA8gE3gXFfCSVy82t4YkXj29fBIv4db2_nBQDHZGu8_gNgn1k2PU-zqszk7m9jnc0D9mR9OTF9GYEHy9as38CwxlX7w |
| linkToPdf | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V3NbtQwEB6VLaq48A8NFDACLkjRJnZiew8IVS0rVu2u9gCinNL4J7TSNlm6u1S98Qg8D4_DkzB2simrSr31wC2SHSeOP898jsffALxWihspdBEaJoswSaMiVDpKQ1zEMSELZuLYHxTeF6ORPDjojdfg9_IsjAurXNpEb6hNpd0_8i5D4uDS9nHRLZqwiPFu__30e-gySLmd1mU6jRoie_b8DJdvs3eDXRzrN5T2P3za-Rg2GQZCnYg0CblARsNEj1uTFEXKjNLosFKl0ryIVWpNrmLKrWQJVVyw2FirmVBxwXQsTRwxbPcGrCMlT2gH1seD4fhru4eBk0W2gqi0m-sTinYp5cmqC7zEay-HZ_5Lm73f69_5n7_YXbjdsG2yXU-Pe7Bmy_uwMWziCR7Al36doYXMTiqELLpxciF_TpDPkzOXP_jPz1_KBe_PSb6YV17kNp9Mzsk3r9mNnJ208fpkOkHn_xA-X0u3HkGnrEq7CYRGivYkL7RTlhc2llo4mmrwJm1UGgXwajn62bRWFMlq7WiaOYxkHiMBbC0HNWusyiy7GNEAXrbFaA_cJk9e2mrh6jB3mJlH2MTjGkftY1iPu3PGMgC5grC2gtMaXy0pj4-85rhXDkRqGcBbD8YrXj3b3hlSf_Xk6k68gA0EZLY_GO09hVvUJVb24fBb0JmfLuwzuKl_zI9np8-bmUXg8Lqh-ReBr2oF |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Fluence+smoothing+evaluation+for+whole%E2%80%90breast+automatically+generated+treatment+plans&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+applied+clinical+medical+physics&rft.au=Zaratim%2C+Giulianne+Rivelli+R.&rft.au=Oliveira+e+Silva%2C+Luis+Felipe&rft.au=dos+Reis%2C+Ricardo+G.&rft.au=Mendes%2C+Cristiano+Jacques+M.+R.&rft.date=2025-02-01&rft.pub=John+Wiley+and+Sons+Inc&rft.eissn=1526-9914&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=2&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002%2Facm2.14564&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F39611818&rft.externalDocID=PMC11799910 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1526-9914&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1526-9914&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1526-9914&client=summon |