. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Dec 1.

Published in final edited form as: Med Phys. 2017 Oct 26;44(12):6138–6147. doi: 10.1002/mp.12610

Table 1.

Comparison of tumor dose distribution assuming a fixed RBE value of 1.1. The new model RO(BS) and the conventional model RO are almost the same in quality of tumor dose coverage, homogeneity, and robustness.

		Case 1		Case 2		Case 3		Case 4		Case 5

Index	Scenario	RO(BS)	RO	RO(BS)	RO	RO(BS)	RO	RO(BS)	RO	RO(BS)	RO
D_95%, Gy[RBE]	Nominal	75.8	75.9	46.5	46.6	59.8	59.8	59.6	59.6	44.5	44.8
	Max	75.8	75.9	46.5	46.6	59.9	59.9	59.6	59.6	44.5	44.8
	Min	75.2	75.6	45.2	45.7	59.4	59.6	58.3	58.2	44.2	44.5

D_5%–D_95%, Gy[RBE]	Nominal	1.4	1	3.6	3.3	0.9	0.9	3.9	3.8	1.8	1.3
	Max	1.7	1.1	4.6	4	1.2	1.1	4.6	4.5	2	1.5
	Min	1.3	0.8	3.6	3.3	0.9	0.9	3.6	3.6	1.7	1.3

D_95% DVH band, Gy[RBE]		0.6	0.3	1.3	0.9	0.5	0.3	1.3	1.4	0.3	0.3

D_50% DVH band, Gy[RBE]		0.2	0.2	0.4	0.2	0.4	0.4	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2

D_5% DVH band, Gy[RBE]		0.6	0.4	0.6	0.7	0.5	0.4	1.3	1.5	0.3	0.3

		Case 6		Case 7		Case 8		Case 9		Case 10

		RO(BS)	RO	RO(BS)	RO	RO(BS)	RO	RO(BS)	RO	RO(BS)	RO

D_95%, Gy[RBE]	Nominal	76.6	76.8	59.5	59.4	56.7	56.7	44.4	44.5	59.7	59.8
	Max	76.7	76.8	59.5	59.4	57.2	57.2	44.4	44.5	59.7	59.8
	Min	75.2	75.4	53.7	53.7	55.7	55.8	43.2	43.7	58	58.7

D_5%–D_95%, Gy[RBE]	Nominal	4.3	4.3	7.4	7.6	8.5	8.4	3.3	3.2	2.9	2.6
	Max	8	7.8	12.3	12.3	9.2	9	3.9	3.6	2.5	3.1
	Min	3.8	3.1	7.4	7.6	7.9	7.7	3.3	3.1	2.9	2.4

D_95% DVH band, Gy[RBE]		1.5	1.4	5.8	5.7	1.5	1.4	1.2	0.8	1.7	1.1

D_50% DVH band, Gy[RBE]		0.3	0.2	1.4	1.4	1.1	1.1	0.9	0.6	0.4	0.3

D_5% DVH band, Gy[RBE]		3.7	3.7	1.5	1.5	1.9	1.7	1	0.8	1.5	1.6

Abbreviations: DVH, dose-volume histogram