{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027320034692107545, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010407632263660017, 'mean_word_length': 5.119363395225464, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Tumor Control Probability (TCP) and Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP) in Mono and Dual-isocentric Techniques of Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy

Background: Nowadays, radiation therapy plays an important role in the treatment of breast cancer. The important point is the optimal control of the tumor along with the protection of organs at risk. This study aims to investigate and compare the radiobiological factors of the tumor and organs at risk in two different radiation therapy techniques of breast cancer.Methods: Ten left-sided breast cancer patients with breast-conservative surgery were selected for this study. Three-dimensional treatment planning was performed using CT scan images of the patients using PCRT 3D software. Two different tangential external beam techniques were compared: first, dual-isocentric technique (DIT) with two isocentre, one on the breast tissue, and the other one on the supraclavicular lymph nodes and second, a mono-isocentric technique (MIT) with one isocentre at the intersection of the tangential and the supraclavicular field. The total prescribed dose was 5000 cGy per 25 fractions. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs), Tumor control probability (TCP), and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) curves were used to compare the dosimetric and radiobiological parameters of the tissues in the prementioned techniques. Results: The results showed that the maximum doses in planning target volume (PTV) with mean values of 109% and 110% in the SI and DIT were not significantly different in both techniques and that they were indeed at the optimum level based on the RTOG 1005 protocol. The dose homogeneity index in MMIT was more than that in DIT, while the conformity index and the mean TCP did not show a significant difference in the two techniques. Furthermore, minimum, mean, and maximum dose in the lung and the probability of pneumonitis decreased in MIT. On the other hand, the maximum dose, the dose of 33%, 66%, and 100% of the heart, and the probability of pericarditis in MIT were lower than the figure in DIT. Conclusion: Due to the absence of hot spots at the intersection of tangential and supraclavicular fields and the reduction of mechanical movements of the coach and collimator in MIT, the superiority of this method was confirmed.