Dose-volume histograms

Drzymala, Robert E.; Mohan, Radhe; Brewster, Linda J.; Chu, James C.H.; Goitein, Michael; Harms, William B.; Urie, Marcia

doi:10.1016/0360-3016(91)90168-4

Cited by 321 publications

(170 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

152

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…DVHs may be a preliminary step in evaluating statistics such as tumor control and normal tissue complication probabilities. ( 5 , 6 ) However, when comparing a large number of plans, DVHs contain large amounts of data and make the comparison difficult and cumbersome.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dosimetric performance of the new high‐definition multileaf collimator for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Dhabaan

Elder

Schreibmann

et al. 2010

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective was to evaluate the performance of a high‐definition multileaf collimator (MLC) of 2.5 mm leaf width (MLC2.5) and compare to standard 5 mm leaf width MLC (MLC5) for the treatment of intracranial lesions using dynamic conformal arcs (DCA) technique with a dedicated radiosurgery linear accelerator. Simulated cases of spherical targets were created to study solely the effect of target volume size on the performance of the two MLC systems independent of target shape complexity. In addition, 43 patients previously treated for intracranial lesions in our institution were retrospectively planned using DCA technique with MLC2.5 and MLC5 systems. The gross tumor volume ranged from 0.07 to 40.57 cm3 with an average volume of 5.9 cm3. All treatment parameters were kept the same for both MLC‐based plans. The plan evaluation was performed using figures of merits (FOM) for a rapid and objective assessment on the quality of the two treatment plans for MLC2.5 and MLC5. The prescription isodose surface was selected as the greatest isodose surface covering ≥95% of the target volume and delivering 95% of the prescription dose to 99% of target volume. A Conformity Index (CI) and conformity distance index (CDI) were used to quantifying the dose conformity to a target volume. To assess normal tissue sparing, a normal tissue difference (NTD) was defined as the difference between the volume of normal tissue receiving a certain dose utilizing MLC5 and the volume receiving the same dose using MLC2.5. The CI and normal tissue sparing for the simulated spherical targets were better with the MLC2.5 as compared to MLC5. For the clinical patients, the CI and CDI results indicated that the MLC2.5 provides better treatment conformity than MLC5 even at large target volumes. The CI's range was 1.15 to 2.44 with a median of 1.59 for MLC2.5 compared to 1.60–2.85 with a median of 1.71 for MLC5. Improved normal tissue sparing was also observed for MLC2.5 over MLC5, with the NTD always positive, indicating improvement, and ranging from 0.1 to 8.3 for normal tissue receiving 50% (NTV50), 70% (NTV70) and 90% (NTV90) of the prescription dose. The MLC2.5 has a dosimetric advantage over the MLC5 in Linac‐based radiosurgery using DCA method for intracranial lesions, both in treatment conformity and normal tissue sparing when target shape complexity increases.PACS number: 87.56J‐, 87.56 jk

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dosimetric performance of the new high‐definition multileaf collimator for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Dhabaan

Elder

Schreibmann

et al. 2010

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In practice, the plan quality is evaluated by considering the dose-volume histograms (DVHs) [21] of the different organs and target volumes. These are 1D distributions, whose value at a specific dose is the volume of the organ or tumor that would receive at most that much dose under the proposed plan.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Shape Relationship Descriptor for Radiation Therapy Planning

Kazhdan

Simari

McNutt

et al. 2009

Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2009

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this paper we address the challenge of matching patient geometry to facilitate the design of patient treatment plans in radiotherapy. To this end we propose a novel shape descriptor, the Overlap Volume Histogram, which provides a rotation and translation invariant representation of a patient's organs at risk relative to the tumor volume. Using our descriptor, it is possible to accurately identify database patients with similar constellations of organ and tumor geometries, enabling the transfer of treatment plans between patients with similar geometries. We demonstrate the utility of our method for such tasks by outperforming state of the art shape descriptors in the retrieval of patients with similar treatment plans. We also preliminarily show its potential as a quality control tool by demonstrating how it is used to identify an organ at risk whose dose can be significantly reduced.

show abstract

“…Although the AAPM Task Group 53 (TG‐53) report mentions DVH quality assurance (QA) should be conducted, there are no traditional tolerances or detailed recommendations provided for such testing (2) . Merely a need to do it is discussed in literature 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 . In a first‐ever attempt to strategize an accurate assessment of dose‐volume statistics for brachytherapy software, we published an article last year which proposed the basic tolerances for concluded acceptance (9) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addendum to brachytherapy dose‐volume histogram commissioning with multiple planning systems

Gossman

2016

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The process for validating dose‐volume histogram data in brachytherapy software is presented as a supplement to a previously published article. Included is the DVH accuracy evaluation of the Best NOMOS treatment planning system called “Best TPS VohvmePlan” As done previously in other software, a rectangular cuboid was contoured in the treatment planning system. A single radioactive 125I source was positioned coplanar and concentric with one end. Calculations were performed to estimate dose deposition in partial volumes of the cuboid structure, using the brachytherapy dosimetry formalism defined in AAPM Task Group 43. Hand‐calculated, dose‐volume results were compared to TPS‐generated, point‐source‐approximated dose‐volume histogram data to establish acceptance. The required QA for commissioning was satisfied for the DVH as conducted previously for other software, using the criterion that the DVH %VolTPS “actual variance” calculations should differ by no more than 5% at any specific radial distance with respect to %VolTG‐43, and the “average variance” DVH %VolTPS calculations should differ by no more than 2% over all radial distances with respect to %VolTG‐43. The average disagreement observed between hand calculations and treatment planning system DVH was less than 0.5% on average for this treatment planning system and less than 1.1% maximally for 1≤r≤5 cm.PACS number(s): 87.10.+e, 87.55.‐x, 87.53.Jw, 07.05.Tp

show abstract

Dose-volume histograms

Cited by 321 publications

References 15 publications

Dosimetric performance of the new high‐definition multileaf collimator for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Dosimetric performance of the new high‐definition multileaf collimator for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

A Shape Relationship Descriptor for Radiation Therapy Planning

Addendum to brachytherapy dose‐volume histogram commissioning with multiple planning systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About