Click here to


Are you sure ?

Yes, do it No, cancel

A Special Report and Comprehensive Study of 2019 International Planning Competition Results Based On Medical Physics Aspects of Participants Survey

J Chen1*, J Dai1, (1)National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, Beijing, CN


(Sunday, 7/12/2020)   [Eastern Time (GMT-4)]

Room: AAPM ePoster Library

Purpose: investigate the quality of a large population treatment plans of a lung cancer case designed by planners worldwide derived from different planning and delivery system.

Methods: expert committee selected a locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer case and defined ranking system (score metric) with full scores 100 based on practice guideline. It is baseline that plans generated must be clinically treatable. The committee hopes to help the planners to improve their clinical skills through the competition. Planners used their clinical TPS to generate their best plan to submit with a survey, designed to obtain medical physics aspects information. Winners required sharing their plan knowledge by publishing in competition website. Competition offers the opportunity to introduce processes of continual improvement as PDSA Cycle.

Results: average scores of qualified plans (~ 287) were 87.41±9.25 with 72.47% scoring above 85. We found that the scores showed statistically significant differences between with hospital scale, competition experience and modality; scores from VMAT and TOMO are higher than IMRT. These findings are different from Nelm et,al’s conclusion. The regression analysis exhibited the scores had correlation with hard to achieve components, consistent with clinical practice characteristic. 51.2% of total planners abandon V5 of total lung in plan design to achieve ‘better’ plan.

Conclusion: Plan quality was not correlated to work experiences or TPS, but statistically different between hospital scale, modality, competition experience. It demonstrated that several factors affect plan quality besides general planner skill category, which is different with previous study. Although hard objective could achieve by hard work, half of the planner choose tricks that giving up the hardest one. The score metric should more reasonable established to avoid the planner omitted the hardest objective intentionally.


Not Applicable / None Entered.


Not Applicable / None Entered.

Contact Email