Surface Dose Measurements on an Indigenously Made Inhomogeneous Female Pelvic Phantom Using Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor-Field-Effect-Transistor Based Dosimetric System

Document Type : Original Paper



2 Department of Physics, D.A-V. Post Graduate College, Kanpur-208002, India

3 Department of Medical Physics, J.K. Cancer Institute, Kanpur-208001, India


Introduction: Megavoltage X-ray beams are used to treat cervix cancer due to their skin-sparing effect. Preferably, the radiation surface doses should be negligible; however, it increases due to electron contamination produced by various field parameters. Therefore, it is essential to provide proper knowledge about the effect of different field parameters on radiation doses. This study sought to find out the effect of various physical parameters on the surface doses.
Materials and Methods: The effects of field size, source-to-surface distance, and open or acrylic block tray fields on surface doses were determined.  Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor-Field-Effect-Transistor based dosimetric system was used for dose measurements for 6 MV photon beam. The directly measured radiation surface doses on pelvic phantom were compared to surface dose values computed by treatment planning system in the similar field parameters.
Results: The measured results for the percentage depth dose (PDD0) in field size of 10x10 cm2  were 13.32%, 12.95% and 13.87% for open field and 36.87%, 36.31% and 35.88%  for acrylic block tray field. In addition, the computed doses were 7.83%, 7.73% and 7.65% for open field and 16.33%, 16.12% and 15.88% for acrylic block tray field at 80 cm, 100 cm, and 120 cm SSDs, respectively.
Conclusion: The surface dose increases along with the size of the field and decreases with increasing SSD. The surface doses in acrylic block tray fields were significantly higher than the open ones. The treatment planning system computed a lesser radiation doses in same field parameters. 


Main Subjects

  1. Sixel KK, Podgorsak EB. Buildup region and depth of dose maximum of megavoltage x-ray beams. Medical physics. 1994 Mar 1; 21(3): 411-6.
  2. Kim S, Liu CR, Zhu TC, Palta JR. Photon beam skin dose analyses for different clinical setup. Medical physics. 1999 Jun 1; 25(6): 860-6.
  3. Nizin PS. Electronic equilibrium and primary dose in collimated photon beam. Medical physics. 1993 Nov 1; 20(6): 1721-9.
  4. Petti PL. Source of electronic contamination for the clinc-35, 25-MV-photon beam. Med. Phys. 1983; 10: 856-61.
  5. Nilsson B, Brahme A. Electron contamination from photon beam collimators. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 1986 Jan 1; 5(3): 235-44.
  6. Kohno R, Hirano E, Nishio T, Miyagishi T, Goka T, Kawashima M et al. Dosimetric evaluation of a MOSFET detector for clinical application in photon therapy. Radiological physics and technology. 2008 Jan1; 1(1): 55-61.
  7. Thomson I, Thomas RE, Berndt LP. Radiation dosimetry with MOS sensors. Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 1983 Dec 1; 6(1-4): 121- 4.
  8. Butson MJ, Cheung T, Peter KN. Peripheral dose measurement with a MOSFET detector. Applied Radiation and Isotopes. 2005 Apr 1; 62(4): 631-4.
  9. Buston, MJ, Rozenfeld A, Mathur JN, Carolan M, Wong TP, Metcalfe PE. A new radiotherapy surface dose detector: the MOSFET. Medical physics. 1996 May 1; 23(5): 655-8.
  10. Best medical Canada product. Available from: 
  11. Butson MJ, Cheung T, Yu PK. Variation in 6 MV X-rays radiotherapy buildup dose with treatment distance. Australasian Physics & Engineering Sciences in Medicine. 2003 Jun 1; 26(2): 87.
  12. Tannous NB. Buildup and skin dose measurements for the Therac 6 MV linear accelerator for radiation therapy. Med. Phys. 1981; 8: 378-81.