Table 3.
Comparison among both 3D dosimetry methods (LDM and DPK) in terms of D5, D25, D50, D70, and D95 delivered to target normal liver, whole normal liver, and individual tumors: Bland Altman analysis and Lin concordance coefficients
| Bland-Altman | Correlation and concordance coefficients | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ∆D (Gy) | Bias [95%CI] (Gy) | Points beyond ± 2 SD (%) | ρ | ρc | |
| Target normal liver | |||||
| D5 | 0.3 | − 0.9; 0.4 | 7.1 | 0.999 | 0.999 |
| D25 | − 0.2 | − 0.8; 0.4 | 7.1 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| D50 | 0.2 | − 0.8; 1.1 | 0.0 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| D70 | 0.4 | − 1.0; 1.9 | 0.0 | 1.000 | 0.999 |
| D95 | 2.3 | 0.0; 5.9 | 7.1 | 1.000 | 0.996 |
| Whole normal liver | |||||
| D5 | 0.1 | − 0.4; 0.3 | 7.1 | 0.999 | 0.998 |
| D25 | − 0.1 | − 0.5; 0.2 | 7.1 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| D50 | − 0.1 | − 0.9; 0.7 | 7.1 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| D70 | 0.1 | − 1.2; 1.3 | 0.0 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| D95 | 2.5 | 0.1; 4.9 | 7.1 | 1.000 | 0.996 |
| Individual tumors | |||||
| D5 | − 0.3 | − 1.6; 1.0 | 5.0 | 0.999 | 0.999 |
| D25 | − 0.1 | − 1.7; 1.8 | 4.0 | 0.999 | 0.999 |
| D50 | 0.4 | − 1.7; 2.5 | 6.0 | 1.000 | 0.999 |
| D70 | 1.1 | − 2.3; 4.5 | 4.0 | 1.000 | 0.999 |
| D95 | 3.1 | − 9.0; 15.2 | 2.0 | 0.999 | 0.995 |