Skip to main content
. 2017 Jan 24;18(2):9–14. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12038

Table 1.

Dosimetric comparison (target coverage) of 30 patients that were planned by: PRO using the manual objectives as in the clinical plans (clinical); PO using the RapidPlan‐generated objectives (PO); and PRO using the RapidPlan‐generated objectives (PRO). Dose unit (Gy)

Mean SD 95% Confidence interval P
Lower Upper
DPTVboost Clinical 52.22 0.19 52.15 52.29 <0.01a
PO 51.93 0.23 51.85 52.01 0.03a
PRO 52.05 0.30 51.94 52.16
DPTV Clinical 45.51 0.79 45.22 45.81 <0.01
PO 45.85 0.75 45.57 46.13 0.19
PRO 45.94 0.72 45.67 46.21
HIPTVboost Clinical 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.06 <0.01
PO 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.53
PRO 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.05
HIPTV Clinical 0.26 0.01 0.26 0.26 <0.01
PO 0.25 0.01 0.25 0.26 <0.01
PRO 0.26 0.01 0.26 0.26
CIPTVboost Clinical 1.01 0.03 1.00 1.02 <0.01a
PO 1.06 0.05 1.05 1.08 0.60a
PRO 1.07 0.05 1.05 1.09
CIPTV Clinical 1.04 0.03 1.03 1.05 0.34
PO 1.05 0.03 1.04 1.06 <0.01a
PRO 1.03 0.03 1.02 1.04
MUs Clinical 404 30 392 415 <0.01
PO 436 33 423 448 0.81
PRO 437 29 426 448
a

Wilcoxon signed‐rank test (abnormal distribution); otherwise paired samples t‐test (normal distribution).

DPTVboost, mean dose to PTVboost; DPTV, mean dose to PTV; HI, homogeneity index; CI, conformity index; SD, standard deviation; and MUs, monitor units.