A Special Report on 2019 International Planning Competition and a Comprehensive Analysis of Its Results

The aim of this work is to introduce the 2019 International Planning Competition and to analyze its results. A locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) case using the simultaneous integrated boost approach was selected. The plan quality was evaluated by using a ranking system in accord...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Frontiers in oncology 2020-12, Vol.10, p.571644-571644
Hauptverfasser: Chen, Jiayun, Dai, Jianrong, Nobah, Ahmad, Bai, Sen, Bi, Nan, Lai, Youqun, Li, Minghui, Tian, Yuan, Wang, Xuetao, Fu, Qi, Liang, Bin, Zhang, Tao, Xia, Wenlong, Xu, Yuan, Ren, Wenting, Yan, Xuena, Zhu, Ji, Chen, Deqi, Yang, Jiming
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The aim of this work is to introduce the 2019 International Planning Competition and to analyze its results. A locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) case using the simultaneous integrated boost approach was selected. The plan quality was evaluated by using a ranking system in accordance with practice guidelines. Planners used their clinical Treatment Planning System (TPS) to generate the best possible plan along with a survey, designed to obtain medical physics aspects information. We investigated the quality of the large population of plans designed by worldwide planners using different planning and delivery systems. The correlations of plan quality with relevant planner characteristics (work experience, department scale, and competition experience) and with technological parameters (TPS and modality) were examined. The number of the qualified plans was 287 with a wide range of scores (38.61-97.99). The scores showed statistically significant differences by the following factors: 1) department scale: the mean score (89.76 ± 8.36) for planners from the departments treating >2,000 patients annually was the highest of all; 2) competition experience: the mean score for the 107 planners with previous competition experience was 88.92 ± 9.59, statistically significantly from first-time participants ( = .001); 3) techniques: the mean scores for planners using VMAT (89.18 ± 6.43) and TOMO (90.62 ± 7.60) were higher than those using IMRT (82.28 ± 12.47), with statistical differences (
ISSN:2234-943X
2234-943X
DOI:10.3389/fonc.2020.571644