Program Information
Large--Scale DVH Quality Study: Correlated Aims Lead Relaxations
O Nohadani1*, A Roy1 , I Das2 , (1) Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, (2) Indiana University- School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN
Presentations
SU-E-T-531 (Sunday, July 12, 2015) 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM Room: Exhibit Hall
Purpose: Intensity modulated radiation therapy plans are designed to optimally target a tumor while sparing surrounding tissue. Desired dose distributions are iteratively approached via inverse planning. This leads to tradeoffs between clinical objectives for the planning target volume (PTV), organs at risk, and normal tissues. Dose volume histogram (DVHs) related aims are followed that are either institutional or internationally recommended. We analyze common goals and identify potential reasons that often lead to tradeoffs.
Methods:524 IMRT plans for various tumor sites were analyzed based on the main institutional DVH goal for PTV (D95) and the recommendations by ICRU-83 (D2, D50, and D98). Robust statistical tools are developed and applied to ensure that the results are immune to data uncertainties. The probability of violation was measured for each of the DVH goals based on the frequency of not meeting recommended doses. Conditional probabilities for satisfying and/or violating DVH aims were computed to test the hypothesized pair-wise relations between DVH aims. For example, for plans that satisfied D50, the probability of violating D98 was computed via P(D98 < 95% | 98% ≤ D50 ≤ 102%). The equality constraint D50 = 100% was relaxed to encompass the range [98,102]%.
Results:A large majority of cases (88%) satisfied the institutional goal for PTV of D95 ≥ 95%. Similar consensus existed for D98. 51% of cases satisfied D2 ≤ 107%. However, only 18% of cases satisfied D50. The conditional probability showed correlations amongst the studied DVH goals. In fact, a negative correlation was revealed between D50 and D95 (and D98), suggesting that these competing goals cannot be satisfied concurrently.
Conclusion:The majority of plans followed the institutional guidelines. The reason for their deviation from international recommendations seems to be that the latter goals are competing and cannot be satisfied concurrently in clinical practice.
Contact Email: