Sensitivity of radio-photoluminescence glass dosimeters to accumulated doses.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
18
05
2020
accepted:
19
11
2020
entrez:
3
12
2020
pubmed:
4
12
2020
medline:
12
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study investigated the effect of accumulated doses on radio-photoluminescence glass dosimeters (RPLGDs) from measurements involving mega-voltage photons. Forty-five commercially available RPLGDs were irradiated to estimate their dose responses. Photon beams of 6, 10, and 15 MV were irradiated onto the RPLGDs inside a phantom, which were divided into five groups with different doses and energies. Groups 1 and 2 were irradiated at 1, 5, 10, 50, and 100 Gy in a sequential manner; Group 3 was irradiated 10 times with a dose of 10 Gy; and Groups 4 and 5 followed the same method as that of Group 3, but with doses of 50 Gy and 100 Gy, respectively. Each device was subjected to a measurement reading procedure each time irradiation. For the annealed Group 1, RPLGD exhibited a linearity response with variance within 5%. For the non-annealed Group 2, readings demonstrated hyperlinearity at 6 MV and 10 MV, and linearity at 15 MV. Following the 100 Gy irradiation, the readings for Group 2 were 118.7 ± 1.9%, 112.2 ± 2.7%, and 101.5 ± 2.3% at 6, 10, and 15 MV, respectively. For Groups 3, 4, and 5, the responsiveness of the RPLGDs gradually decreased as the number of repeated irradiations increased. The percentage readings for the 10th beam irradiation with respect to the readings for the primary beam irradiation were 84.6 ± 1.9%, 87.5 ± 2.4%, and 93.0 ± 3.0% at 6 MV, 10 MV, and 15 MV, respectively. The non-annealed RPLGD response to dose was hyperlinear for the 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams but not for the 15 MV photon beam. Additionally, the annealed RPLGD exhibited a fading phenomenon when the measurement was repeated several times and demonstrated a relatively large fading effect at low energies than at high energies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
This study investigated the effect of accumulated doses on radio-photoluminescence glass dosimeters (RPLGDs) from measurements involving mega-voltage photons.
METHODS
Forty-five commercially available RPLGDs were irradiated to estimate their dose responses. Photon beams of 6, 10, and 15 MV were irradiated onto the RPLGDs inside a phantom, which were divided into five groups with different doses and energies. Groups 1 and 2 were irradiated at 1, 5, 10, 50, and 100 Gy in a sequential manner; Group 3 was irradiated 10 times with a dose of 10 Gy; and Groups 4 and 5 followed the same method as that of Group 3, but with doses of 50 Gy and 100 Gy, respectively. Each device was subjected to a measurement reading procedure each time irradiation.
RESULTS
For the annealed Group 1, RPLGD exhibited a linearity response with variance within 5%. For the non-annealed Group 2, readings demonstrated hyperlinearity at 6 MV and 10 MV, and linearity at 15 MV. Following the 100 Gy irradiation, the readings for Group 2 were 118.7 ± 1.9%, 112.2 ± 2.7%, and 101.5 ± 2.3% at 6, 10, and 15 MV, respectively. For Groups 3, 4, and 5, the responsiveness of the RPLGDs gradually decreased as the number of repeated irradiations increased. The percentage readings for the 10th beam irradiation with respect to the readings for the primary beam irradiation were 84.6 ± 1.9%, 87.5 ± 2.4%, and 93.0 ± 3.0% at 6 MV, 10 MV, and 15 MV, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The non-annealed RPLGD response to dose was hyperlinear for the 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams but not for the 15 MV photon beam. Additionally, the annealed RPLGD exhibited a fading phenomenon when the measurement was repeated several times and demonstrated a relatively large fading effect at low energies than at high energies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33270667
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234829
pii: PONE-D-20-14762
pmc: PMC7714242
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0234829Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
No authors have competing interests.
Références
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2013 Sep;36(3):331-7
pubmed: 23801092
Med Phys. 2007 May;34(5):1759-65
pubmed: 17555257
Med Phys. 2007 Dec;34(12):4594-604
pubmed: 18196786
Med Phys. 2010 Jan;37(1):132-40
pubmed: 20175474
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2003 Spring;4(2):132-42
pubmed: 12777148
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2012 May 10;13(3):3745
pubmed: 22584173
J Radiat Res. 2000 Jun;41(2):129-37
pubmed: 11037580
Igaku Butsuri. 2000;20(3):131-139
pubmed: 12764244
N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 20;375(16):1591
pubmed: 27797308
Radiat Oncol J. 2018 Mar;36(1):1-10
pubmed: 29621869
Radiat Oncol. 2015 Apr 12;10:86
pubmed: 25881084
Med Phys. 2004 Jul;31(7):1980-6
pubmed: 15305450
Br J Cancer. 2018 Aug;119(4):389-407
pubmed: 30061587
Radiat Oncol. 2017 Feb 27;12(1):41
pubmed: 28241841
Phys Med. 2017 Dec;44:26-33
pubmed: 29254588
Br J Radiol. 2017 Apr;90(1072):20160915
pubmed: 28205452
Acta Oncol. 2009;48(8):1193-7
pubmed: 19863228
Med Phys. 2002 Mar;29(3):269-74
pubmed: 11930912
Int J Urol. 2019 Aug;26(8):775-784
pubmed: 31115116
Strahlenther Onkol. 2017 Jan;193(1):46-54
pubmed: 27812732
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2006;119(1-4):327-31
pubmed: 16709718
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2012 Apr;149(2):101-8
pubmed: 21636557