Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of plan quality for the plans resulting from the optimization

From: Comparison of direct machine parameter optimization versus fluence optimization with sequential sequencing in IMRT of hypopharyngeal carcinoma

 

IM

DSS

p-value

PTV

mean

SD

mean

SD

 

PTV

     

D95

49.6

2.7

52.6

0.6

0.005

D5

60.1

0.4

58.6

0.4

< 0.0005

D average

55.7

1.0

56.0

0.2

0.3

H = (D5-D95)/Daverage

18.9

5.4

10.8

1.7

< 0.0005

V95*

81.0

8.3

91.9

3.3

0.002

V107*

6.7

2.5

0.9

0.9

< 0.0005

left parotid

     

D50

19.0

2.4

22.0

1.6

0.007

right parotid

     

D50

20.4

1.8

21.9

0.9

0.03

spinal cord

     

Dmax

31.1

2.9

30.5

3.2

0.4

external

     

Dmax

64.3

1.3

62.2

1.3

0.001

Efficiency

     

# Segments

77.0

7.9

76.6

7.9

0.9

# MU

1151

157

901

160

0.007

  1. Mean values, standard deviations and p-values for the treatment plans resulting from the optimization with IM and DSS respectively. Dose values are given in Gy, the homogeneity H in % of the average dose and volumes in % of the volume of interest.
Back to article page

Radiation Oncology

ISSN: 1748-717X

Contact us