Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2025
Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ α and β Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition
Published on: March 11, 2021
Assessment of peripheral dose as a function of distance and depth from cobalt-60 beam in water phantom using TLD-100
Habib Ahmad1, Javaid Ali2, Khalil Ahmad3
1Swat Institute of Nuclear Medicine, Oncology & Radiotherapy (SINOR) Cancer Hospital, Saidu Sharif Swat, KPK, Pakistan.
Background:
Innovations in cancer treatment have contributed to the improved survival rate of cancer patients. The cancer survival rates have been growing and nearly two third of those survivors have been exposed to clinical radiation during their treatment. The study of long-term radiation effects, especially secondary cancer induction, has become increasingly important. An accurate assessment of out-of-field/peripheral dose (PDs) is necessary to estimate the risk of second cancer after radiotherapy and the damage to the organs at risk surrounding the planning target volume. This study was designed to measure the PDs as a function of dose, distances, and depths from Telecobalt-60 (Co-60) beam in water phantom using thermoluminescent dosimeter-100 (TLD-100).
Methods:
The PDs were measured for Co-60 beam at specified depths of 0 cm (surface), 5 cm, 10 cm, and 15 cm outside the radiation beam at distances of 5, 10, and 13 cm away from the radiation field edge using TLD-100 (G1 cards) as detectors. These calibrated cards were placed on the acrylic disc in circular tracks. The radiation dose of 2000 mGy of Co-60 beam was applied inside 10 × 10 cm2 field size at constant source to surface distance (SSD) of 80 cm.
Results:
The results showed maximum and minimum PDs at surface and 5 cm depth respectively at all distances from the radiation field edge. Dose distributions out of the field edge with respect to distance were isotropic. The decrease in PDs at 5 cm depth was due to dominant forward scattering of Co-60 gamma rays. The increase in PDs beyond 5 cm depth was due to increase in the irradiated volume, increase in penumbra, increase in source to axis distance (SAD), and increase in field size due to inverse square factor.
Conclusion:
It is concluded that the PDs depends upon depth and distance from the radiation field edge. All the measurements show PDs in the homogenous medium (water); therefore, it estimates absorbed dose to the organ at risk (OAR) adjacent to cancer tissues/planning target volume (PTV). It is suggested that PDs can be minimized by using the SAD technique, as this technique controls sources of scattered radiation like inverse square factor and effect of penumbra up-to some extent.
