Arezoo Kazemzadeh1, Iraj Abedi2, Alireza Amouheidari3, Atefeh Shirvany4. 1. Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran. 2. Medical Physics Department, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. 3. Isfahan Milad Hospital, Isfahan, Iran. 4. Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present research was aimed to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of conventional fractionated radiotherapy versus hypo-fractionated radiotherapy in breast cancer utilizing a radiobiological model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five left-sided breast cancer patients without involvement of the supraclavicular and axillary lymph nodes (with the nodal stage of N0) that had been treated with conventional or hypo-fractionated were incorporated in this study. A radiobiological model was performed to foretell normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and tumor control probability (TCP). RESULTS: The data represented that TCP values for conventional and hypo-fractionated regimens were 99.16 ± 0.09 and 95.96 ± 0.48, respectively (p = 0.00). Moreover, the NTCP values of the lung for conventional and hypo-fractionated treatment were 0.024 versus 0.13 (p = 0.035), respectively. Also, NTCP values of the heart were equal to zero for both regimens. CONCLUSION: In summary, hypo-fractionated regimens had comparable efficacy to conventional fraction radiation therapy in the case of dosimetry parameters for patients who had left breast cancer. But, utilizing the radiobiological model, conventional fractionated regimens presented better results compared to hypo-fractionated regimens.
BACKGROUND: The present research was aimed to compare the toxicity and effectiveness of conventional fractionated radiotherapy versus hypo-fractionated radiotherapy in breast cancer utilizing a radiobiological model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five left-sided breast cancer patients without involvement of the supraclavicular and axillary lymph nodes (with the nodal stage of N0) that had been treated with conventional or hypo-fractionated were incorporated in this study. A radiobiological model was performed to foretell normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) and tumor control probability (TCP). RESULTS: The data represented that TCP values for conventional and hypo-fractionated regimens were 99.16 ± 0.09 and 95.96 ± 0.48, respectively (p = 0.00). Moreover, the NTCP values of the lung for conventional and hypo-fractionated treatment were 0.024 versus 0.13 (p = 0.035), respectively. Also, NTCP values of the heart were equal to zero for both regimens. CONCLUSION: In summary, hypo-fractionated regimens had comparable efficacy to conventional fraction radiation therapy in the case of dosimetry parameters for patients who had left breast cancer. But, utilizing the radiobiological model, conventional fractionated regimens presented better results compared to hypo-fractionated regimens.
Authors: Vassilis Kouloulias; Eftychia Mosa; Anna Zygogianni; Efrosini Kypraiou; John Georgakopoulos; Kalliopi Platoni; Christos Antypas; George Kyrgias; Maria Tolia; Christos Papadimitriou; Amanda Psyrri; George Patatoukas; Maria Dilvoi; Christina Armpilia; Kyriaki Theodorou; Maria-Aggeliki Kalogeridi; Ivelina Beli; John Kouvaris; Nikolaos Kelekis Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2016-09-28 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: M V Graham; J A Purdy; B Emami; W Harms; W Bosch; M A Lockett; C A Perez Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1999-09-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: I Fragkandrea; V Kouloulias; P Mavridis; A Zettos; S Betsou; P Georgolopoulou; A Sotiropoulou; A Gouliamos; I Kouvaris Journal: Hippokratia Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 0.471
Authors: Elisa K Chan; Ryan Woods; Sean Virani; Caroline Speers; Elaine S Wai; Alan Nichol; Mary L McBride; Scott Tyldesley Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2014-09-13 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Gillian C Barnett; Charlotte E Coles; Rebecca M Elliott; Caroline Baynes; Craig Luccarini; Don Conroy; Jennifer S Wilkinson; Jonathan Tyrer; Vivek Misra; Radka Platte; Sarah L Gulliford; Matthew R Sydes; Emma Hall; Søren M Bentzen; David P Dearnaley; Neil G Burnet; Paul D P Pharoah; Alison M Dunning; Catharine M L West Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2011-12-12 Impact factor: 41.316