Table 1.

The dosimetric comparisons for DA‐VMAT and 7F‐IMRT.

Parameter	Objective	7F‐IMRT	DA‐VMAT	p‐value
${\text{PTV}}_{50.4}-{\mathrm{V}}_{95\%}$	100%	$99.13\pm 0.18\hspace{0.17em}(98.80–99.53)$	$99.01\pm 0.32\hspace{0.17em}(98.5–99.75)$	n/s
${\text{PTV}}_{50.4}-{\mathrm{V}}_{100\%}$	95%	$95.09\pm 0.34\hspace{0.17em}(94.69–95.59)$	$95.13\pm 0.23\hspace{0.17em}(94.73–95.57)$	n/s
${\text{PTV}}_{59.4}-{\mathrm{V}}_{100\%}$	95%	$95.37\pm 0.80\hspace{0.17em}(94.56–96.78)$	$95.12\pm 0.21\hspace{0.17em}(94.87–95.49)$	n/s
${\text{PTV}}_{72}-{\mathrm{V}}_{100\%}$	95%	$95.54\pm 0.39\hspace{0.17em}(94.76–95.97)$	$95.41\pm 0.27\hspace{0.17em}(94.87–95.73)$	n/s
${\text{PTV}}_{72}-{\mathrm{V}}_{110\%}$	$\le 5\%$	$2.15\pm 1.07\hspace{0.17em}(0.82–5.14)$	$1.70\pm 0.83\hspace{0.17em}(0–3.21)$	n/s
CI	1	$1.27\pm 0.05\hspace{0.17em}(1.21–1.37)$	$1.24\pm 0.05\hspace{0.17em}(1.16–1.31)$	n/s
HI	1	$1.11\pm 0.02\hspace{0.17em}(1.07–1.14)$	$1.09\pm 0.02\hspace{0.17em}(1.07–1.13)$	$<0.05$

Abbreviations: IMRT: intensity‐modulated radiotherapy; 7F: 7‐field fixed‐beam IMRT; DA‐VMAT: dual arcs with the SmartArc technique; PTV: planning target volume; ${\mathrm{V}}_{100\%}$: volume receiving $\ge 100\%$ of the prescribed dose for the 95% of PTV; ${\mathrm{V}}_{110\%}$: no more than 5% of any ${\mathrm{PTV}}_{72}$ will receive $\ge 110\%$ of the prescribed dose; CI: conformity index; HI: homogeneity index; statistical significance $(p<0.05)$ is reported from a paired two‐side Wilcoxon signed‐rank test; n/s: not statistically significant; numbers in fields were shown in the format of $mean\pm \text{standard}\hspace{0.17em}\text{deviation}$ (range).