Table 1.
Dose volume constraints for prostate volumetric modulated arc therapy plans.
Table 2.
Parameters used to calculate tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP).
Fig 1.
The average dose volume histograms of the planning target volume, bladder, rectum, and femoral heads on prostate VMAT plan using various calculation grid sizes and algorithms.
Table 3.
Mean and standard deviation of dosimetric parameters for planning target volume (PTV).
Fig 2.
Percentage volumes receiving at least X% of prescription dose (VX%) of organs at risk.
Table 4.
Dosimetric data of organs at risk.
Table 5.
The deviation of average dosimetric parameters depending on the algorithms and grid size.
The reference is AXB plan with 1 mm grid, and the deviation is calculated by dividing the difference of dosimetric parameters between the reference and evaluation one by that of the reference.
Fig 3.
The dose distributions of one patient.
The top line shows the dose distributions of the AXB plan minus AAA at 1 mm grid size. The median line shows the dose distributions of the AXB plan with 1 mm grid, and the bottom line shows the dose distributions of the AAA plan with 1 mm grid. The image planes of each line are axial, sagittal, and coronal view in that order.
Fig 4.
Dose distribution subtracted the plan with 1 mm grid from that of 3 mm in AAA.
Each image are axial plane of one patient from the top of planning target volume to the bottom of that at 12 mm intervals.
Fig 5.
Dose distribution subtracted the plan with 1 mm grid from that of 3 mm in AXB.
Each image are axial plane of one patient from the top of planning target volume to the bottom of that at 12 mm intervals.
Table 6.
Average and standard deviations of tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) values depending on the algorithms and grid size.
Table 7.
Statistical analysis results depending on the dose calculation algorithms and grid size.
The comparison groups are (AAA1 vs AXB1), (AAA3 vs AXB3), (AAA1 vs AAA3), (AAA1 vs AAA5), (AXB1 vs AXB2), (AXB1 vs AXB3) from the left.
Table 8.
Average and standard deviation of dose calculation times recorded at different algorithms and grid size.