Skip Navigation


Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access originally published online on August 26, 2008
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2008 100(17):1265-1266; doi:10.1093/jnci/djn235
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
100/17/1265    most recent
djn235v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Das, I. J.
Right arrow Articles by Glatstein, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Das, I. J.
Right arrow Articles by Glatstein, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press.

CORRESPONDENCE

Response: Re: Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Dose Prescription, Recording, and Delivery: Patterns of Variability Among Institutions and Treatment Planning Systems

I. J. Das, C. W. Cheng, K. L. Chopra, R. K. Mitra, S. P. Srivastava, E. Glatstein

Affiliations of authors: Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (IJD, EG); Morristown Memorial Hospital, Morristown, NJ (CWC); Kennedy Health System, Sewell, NJ (KLC); Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA (RKM); Reid Hospital & Health Care Service, Richmond, IN (SPS)

Correspondence to: Indra J. Das, Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, 2 Donner Bldg, 3400 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 (e-mail: das@xrt.upenn.edu).

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

We thank Olch and Lavey, Deye et al., Galvin et al., and Chien et al. for their interest in our paper (1) and their willingness to be provoked into a response. The discussion of some of the issues raised is healthy, and it is worthwhile to challenge the assumptions inherent in this topic. We agree that both clinical significance and achievability should be carefully considered in developing the dose–volume specifications used in clinical trials, and that . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?