Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Frontiers in Medicine · September 30, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Purpose To compare the radiobiological characteristics of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) and conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) delivered with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC) requiring regional nodal irradiation (RNI). Methods Eighteen patients with SBBC receiving bilateral breast/chest wall irradiation and comprehensive nodal coverage were retrospectively included. For each patient, VMAT plans were generated for CFRT (50 Gy in 25 fractions) and HFRT (40.05 Gy in 15 fractions). Dosimetric parameters of the planning target volume (PTV) were evaluated. Radiobiological assessment included equivalent uniform dose (EUD), tumor control probability (TCP), and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP). TCP was calculated using LQ-Poisson and Niemierko models, while NTCP for the lungs, heart, spinal cord, and esophagus was estimated using Lyman Kutcher Burman and Niemierko models. Results Both regimens achieved excellent target coverage, with mean PTV V 95% values exceeding 99%. HFRT significantly reduced high-dose regions within the PTV, as reflected by lower V 107% values (median: 1.35% vs. 2.60%; IQR: 5.75% vs. 7.85%; P < 0.001). PTV EUD was significantly lower with HFRT than with CFRT (median: 45.69 vs. 51.34 Gy; P < 0.001). Although TCP values were lower with HFRT in both models, tumor control remained high for both schedules. HFRT also significantly reduced EUD and NTCP values for the lungs, heart, and esophagus, whereas no significant differences were observed for the spinal cord. Conclusion For SBBC patients requiring RNI, HFRT-VMAT achieved target coverage comparable to CFRT while reducing excessive high-dose regions and predicted toxicity to major thoracic organs. Despite slightly lower TCP values, overall tumor control remained favorable, supporting HFRT-VMAT as a feasible treatment option for this patient population.