Radiological properties of the PRESAGE and PAGAT polymer dosimeters

The radiological properties of the PRESAGE and PAGAT polymer dosimeters have been investigated and their water equivalence determined for use in radiotherapy dosimetry. The radiological water equivalence of each of the polymer dosimeters was determined by comparing the photon and electron interaction cross-sections over the 10 keV-20 MeV energy range and by Monte Carlo modelling the depth dose from a linear accelerator using the BEAMnrc software package. PRESAGE was found to have an effective Z-value and mass density (kg m-3) approximately 17% and 10% higher than water, respectively. A maximum difference of 85% was discovered in the photoelectric interaction probability curve of PRESAGE when compared to water over the energy range 10-100 keV, partially due to the Z3 dependence of the photoelectric effect. The mass radiative stopping power ratios and mass scattering power ratios were both found to have less than 9% difference from water. The depth dose for PRESAGE from a 6 MV photon beam had an absolute percentage difference to water of less than 2% and a relative percentage difference of less than 8%. The mass density of PAGAT was found to be 2.6% higher than water due to its high gelatine and monomer concentration. The cross-sectional attenuation and absorption coefficient ratios were found to be within 5% for energies between 10 and 100 keV and within 1% for energies between 100 keV and 20 MeV. The mass collisional stopping power, mass radiative stopping power and mass scattering power ratios were all less than 1% over the energy range studied. The depth dose had an absolute percentage difference to water of less than 1% and a relative percentage difference of less than 2.5%. These results indicate that the PAGAT polymer gel formulation is more radiological water equivalent than the PRESAGE formulation. However, the PRESAGE dosimeter offers some advantages in terms of ease of use and its lack of water equivalence may be overcome with dosimetric correction factors.5 page(s