Raman spectroscopy as a tool to evaluate oxygen effects on the response of polymer gel dosimetry

Chemical Overview of Gel Dosimetry Systems: A Comprehensive Review

Advances in radiotherapy technology during the last 25 years have significantly improved both dose conformation to tumors and the preservation of healthy tissues, achieving almost real-time feedback by means of high-precision treatments and theranostics. Owing to this, developing high-performance systems capable of coping with the challenging requirements of modern ionizing radiation is a key issue to overcome the limitations of traditional dosimeters. In this regard, a deep understanding of the physicochemical basis of gel dosimetry, as one of the most promising tools for the evaluation of 3D high-spatial-resolution dose distributions, represents the starting point for developing new and innovative systems. This review aims to contribute thorough descriptions of the chemical processes and interactions that condition gel dosimetry outputs, often phenomenologically addressed, and particularly formulations reported since 2017.

Hydrogels for Three-Dimensional Ionizing-Radiation Dosimetry

Radiation-sensitive gels are among the most recent and promising developments for radiation therapy (RT) dosimetry. RT dosimetry has the twofold goal of ensuring the quality of the treatment and the radiation protection of the patient. Benchmark dosimetry for acceptance testing and commissioning of RT systems is still based on ionization chambers. However, even the smallest chambers cannot resolve the steep dose gradients of up to 30-50% per mm generated with the most advanced techniques. While a multitude of systems based, e.g., on luminescence, silicon diodes and radiochromic materials have been developed, they do not allow the truly continuous 3D dose measurements offered by radiation-sensitive gels. The gels are tissue equivalent, so they also serve as phantoms, and their response is largely independent of radiation quality and dose rate. Some of them are infused with ferrous sulfate and rely on the radiation-induced oxidation of ferrous ions to ferric ions (Fricke-gels). Other formulations consist of monomers dispersed in a gelatinous medium (Polyacrylamide gels) and rely on radiation-induced polymerization, which creates a stable polymer structure. In both gel types, irradiation causes changes in proton relaxation rates that are proportional to locally absorbed dose and can be imaged using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Changes in color and/or opacification of the gels also occur upon irradiation, allowing the use of optical tomography techniques. In this work, we review both Fricke and polyacrylamide gels with emphasis on their chemical and physical properties and on their applications for radiation dosimetry.

Dose-response of Fricke- and PAGAT-dosimetry gels in kilovoltage and megavoltage photon beams: Impact of LET on sensitivity

PURPOSE

Dosimetry of ionizing radiation quantifies the energy deposited by an incident beam to the medium. This study presents the relative response of two types of gel dosimeters describing their differences by estimating radiation chemical yields produced in water radiolysis.

METHODS

Two types of gel dosimeter were used, namely an acid ferrous ion solution infused with xylenol orange known as Fricke gel and a polymer gel based on acrylamide and N,N'-methylenebis(acrylamide) known as PAGAT. Samples were irradiated using two photon beam energies, one from a conventional X-ray tube operated at 44 kV and the other one from a LINAC operated at 6 MV. The dosimeters were analyzed by optical absorbance and magnetic resonance imaging. Additionally, the linear energy transfer of each beam was calculated using Monte Carlo simulations for further estimation of the radiation chemical yields produced during water radiolysis.

RESULTS

Obtained results for both gel dosimeters indicate that their response at 44 kV and 6 MV are different, regardless of the read-out technique. On average, the sensitivity at 44 kV was found to be 65 % of the response at 6 MV. The calculated radiation chemical yields are in agreement with the observed experimental results.

CONCLUSIONS

The main reason for the difference in the response of the dosimeters may be related to the linear energy transfer of each photon beam, which varies the production of primary chemical species during water radiolysis.