ArticleInternational journal of women's health2026
Impact of Isocenter Configuration and Flattening Filter Free Delivery on VMAT Planning for Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the relative impact of isocenter configuration and flattening filter free (FFF) beam delivery on dosimetric performance, radiobiological outcomes, and treatment efficiency in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC). Methods: Twenty-two treatment plans were generated for patients with SBBC using four VMAT configurations, including single-isocenter and dual-isocenter strategies with either flattened (FF) or FFF beams. Target coverage and plan quality were assessed using standard dose volume parameters. Doses to organs at risk (OARs), including the whole lung, heart, left anterior descending artery (LAD), aorta, liver, spinal cord, and skin, were evaluated. Treatment times and total monitor units (MUs) were recorded. Radiobiological outcomes were estimated using tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) models. Statistical comparisons were performed between planning strategies and beam delivery modes. Results: Dual-isocenter VMAT consistently achieved superior target coverage, dose homogeneity, and sparing of thoracic OARs compared with single-isocenter VMAT. In particular, dual-isocenter planning reduced the mean heart dose by approximately 35% (11.83 ± 1.41 Gy vs 7.69 ± 1.11 Gy) and decreased heart V Conclusion: Isocenter configuration had a greater impact on dosimetric and radiobiological outcomes than beam flattening mode. Dual-isocenter VMAT improved target coverage and OAR sparing, while FFF delivery offered limited benefit. Single-isocenter techniques may improve efficiency and simplicity, highlighting the tradeoff between plan quality and treatment efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.