Skip to main content Accessibility help

Dosimetric comparison of photon beam profile characteristics for different treatment parameters

  • Qurat-ul-ain Shamsi (a1), Maria Atiq (a1), Atia Atiq (a1), Saeed Ahmad Buzdar (a1), Khalid Iqbal (a2) and Muhammad Mazhar Iqbal (a3)...



To deliver radiation doses with higher accuracy, radiation treatment through megavoltage photon beams from linear accelerators, is accepted widely for treating malignancies. Before calibrating the linear accelerators, it is essential to make a complete analysis of all photon beam profile parameters. The main objective of this exploration was to investigate the 6 and 15 MV photon beam profile characteristics to improve the accuracy of radiation treatment plans.


In this exploration, treatment parameters like depth, field size and beam energy were varied to observe their effect on dosimetric characteristics of beam profiles in a water phantom, generated by linear accelerator Varian Clinac.


The results revealed that D max and D min decreased with increasing depth but increased with increasing field sizes. Both left and right penumbras increased with increasing depth, field size and energy. Homogeneity increased with field size but decreased with depth. Symmetry had no dependence on depth, energy and field size.


All the characteristics of photon beam dosimetry were analysed and the characteristics like homogeneity and symmetry measured by an ion chamber in a water phantom came within clinically acceptable level of 3 and 103%, respectively, thus fulfilled the requirements of standard linear accelerator specifications. This exploration can be extended to the determination of beam profile characteristics of electron and photon beams of other energies at various depths and field sizes for designing optimum treatment plans.


Corresponding author

Correspondence to: Qurat-ul-ain Shamsi, Physics Department, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Punjab 63100, Pakistan. Tel: 0622875063. E-mail:


Hide All
1. Deng, J, Feng, Y, Ma, C, Yin, F F. Novel technologies for improved treatment outcome and patient safety in cancer radiotherapy. BioMed Res Int 2016; 2016: Article ID 3016454.
2. Sahoo, S K, Mukharjee, R. Study on Variation of Quality Assurance data of a Linear Accelerator after Thirteen years Operation for Cancer Treatment. Euro J Pharm Med Res 2016; 3 (2): 177180.
3. Fogliata, A, Garcia, R, Knoos, T et al. Definition of parameters for quality assurance of flattening filter free (FFF) photon beams in radiation therapy. Med. Phys 2012; 39: 64556464.
4. Barnes, M P, Greer, P B. Time-resolved beam symmetry measurement for VMAT commissioning and quality assurance. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2016; 17 (2): 220230.
5. Nath, R, Biggs, P J, Bova, F J et al. AAPM code of practice for radiotherapy accelerators: Report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Task Group No. 45. Med Phys 1994; 21 (7): 10931121.
6. Pathak, P, Mishra, P K, Singh, M, Mishra, P K. Analytical study of flatness and symmetry of electron beam with 2D array detectors. J Cancer Sci Ther 2015; 7: 294301.
7. Klein, EE, Hanley, J, Bayouth, J et al. Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators. Med Phys. 2009; 36 (9): 41974212.
8. Khan, F M, Gibbons, J P. Khan’s the Physics of Radiation Therapy. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2014.
9. Clivio, A, Nicolini, G, Vanetti, E, Fogliata, A, Cozzi, L. Commissioning and early experience with a new-generation low-energy linear accelerator with advanced delivery and imaging functionalities. Radiat Oncol 2011; 6: 129.
10. Xhafa, B, Mulaj, T, Hodolli, G, Nafezi, G. Dose distribution of photon beam by Siemens linear accelerator. Int J Med Phys Clin Eng Radiat Oncol 2014; 3: 6770.
11. Shende, R, Gupta, G, Patel, G, Kumar, S. Commissioning of TrueBeamTM medical linear accelerator: quantitative and qualitative dosimetric analysis and comparison of flattening filter (FF) and flattening filter free (FFF) Beam. Int J Med Phys Clin Eng Radiat Oncol 2016; 5: 5169.
12. Hussain, M, Rhoades, J. On beam quality and flatness of radiotherapy megavoltage photon beams. Australas Phy Eng Sci Med 2016; 39 (1): 135145.
13. Das, I J, Cheng, C W, Watts, R J et al. Accelerator beam data commissioning equipment and procedures: report of the TG-106 of the Therapy Physics Committee of the AAPM. Med Phys 2008; 35: 41864215.
14. Aletti, P. ed. Recommendations for a Quality Assurance Programme in External Radiotherapy: Report. Nancy, France: Garant Publishers, Centre Alexis Vautrin, 1995.
15. Kouloulias, V E, Poortmans, P, Antypas, C, Kappas, C, Sandilos, P. Field flatness and symmetry of photon beams: review of the current recommendations. Technol Health Care 2003; 11 (4): 283288.
16. Galiano, E, Joly, T, Wiebe, F. Proposed definitions for isodose flatness and symmetry in clinical radiotherapy beams. Appl Radiat Isot 2004; 61 (6): 13611366.
17. Zhang, Y, Feng, Y, Ming, X, Deng, J. Energy modulated photon radiotherapy: a Monte Carlo feasibility study. BioMed Res Int 2016; Article ID 7319843.
18. Lopez, P O, Rajan, G, Podgorsak, E B. Radiation protection and safety in radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol Phys 2005; 549609.



Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed