The objective evaluation of alternative treatment plans: II. Score functions

A series of six patients with adenocarcinoma of the prostate, Stages A2, B1, or B2, were planned for treatment using a four-field box technique at 25 MV. Plans were prepared by three techniques: composite, mid-plane, and conformal. The dose distributions at the central plane and at two planes offset by +/- 2 cm were evaluated by means of score functions which quantify the magnitude of regret for target dose gradient, target over- and under-dose, non-target tissue overdose, and for overdose to the rectum, bladder, and femoral heads. The score functions are normalized to give values in the range from 10 (ideal) to zero (limit of acceptability), with negative values indicating unacceptable deviations from the prescribed dose limits. The scores for off-axis conformal plans were found to be essentially the same as for mid-plane plans on the central plane. However, mid-plane planning was shown to be totally inadequate for off-axis planes, where the average target gradient and underdose scores were reduced by 10 units. Composite planning resulted in adequate target coverage on all planes, but at the expense of unacceptable overdose to non-target tissue. The effect of reducing the posterior beam weight to half that of the other three beams was to reduce the target gradient score by 1.6 +/- 0.5 units and to increase the rectal score by 0.9 +/- 0.3 units.