FCCC LOGO Faculty Publications
Cheng CW , Das IJ
Treatment plan evaluation using dose-volume histogram (DVH) and spatial dose-volume histogram (zDVH)
International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 1999 Mar 15;43(5) :1143-1150
PMID: ISI:000079279100029   
Back to previous list
Objective: The dose-volume histogram (DVH) has been accepted as a tool for treatment-plan evaluation. However, DVH lacks spatial information. A new concept, the z-dependent dose-volume histogram (zDVH), is presented as a supplement to the DVH in three-dimensional (3D) treatment planning to provide the spatial variation, as well as the size and magnitude of the different dose regions within a region of interest. Materials and Methods: Three-dimensional dose calculations were carried out with various plans for three disease sites: lung, breast, and prostate. DVHs were calculated for the entire volume. A zDVH is defined as a differential dose-volume histogram with respect to a computed tomographic (CT) slice position. In this study, zDVNs were calculated for each CT slice in the treatment field. DVHs and zDVHs were compared. Results: In the irradiation of lung, DVH calculation indicated that the treatment plan satisfied the dose-volume constraint placed on the lung and zDVH of the lung revealed that a sizable fraction of the lung centered about the central axis (CAX) received a significant dose, a situation that warranted a modification of the treatment plan due to the removal of one lung. In the irradiation of breast with tangential fields, the DVH showed that about 7% of the breast volume received at least 110% of the prescribed dose (PD) and about 11% of the breast received less than 98% PD. However, the zDVHs of the breast volume in each of seven planes showed the existence of high-dose regions of 34% and 15%, respectively, of the volume in the two caudal- most planes and cold spots of about 40% in the two cephalic planes. In the treatment planning of prostate, DVHs showed that about 15% of the bladder and 40% of the rectum received 102% PD, whereas about 30% of the bladder and 50% of the rectum received the full dose. Taking into account the hollow structure of both the bladder and the rectum, the dose-surface histograms (DSH) showed larger hot-spot volume, about 37% of the bladder wall and 43% of the rectal wall. The zDVHs of the bladder revealed that the hot-spot region was superior to the central axis. The zDVHs of the rectum showed that the high-dose region was an 8-cm segment mostly superior to the central axis. The serial array-like of the rectum warrants a closer attention with regard to the complication probability of the organ. Conclusions: Although DVH provides an averaged dose-volume information, zDVH provides differential dose-volume information with respect to the CT slice position, zDVH is a 2D analog of a 3D DVH and, in some situations, more superior. It provides additional information on plan evaluation that otherwise could not be appreciated. The zDVH may be used along with DVH for plan evaluation and for the correlation of radiation outcome. (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.
Times Cited: 3 English Article 178RD INT J RADIAT ONCOL BIOL PHYS