Determination of absorbed dose at different methods of target irradiation with scanning proton beam by means of chemical dosimeter FBX

«Radiation and Risk», 2020, vol. 29, No. 2, pp.78-88

DOI: DOI: 10.21870/0131-3878-2020-29-2-78-88


Koryakina E.V. – Sen. Res., C. Sc., Biol. Contacts: 4 Korolev str., Obninsk, Kaluga region, Russia, 249035. Tel.: (484) 399-72-76; e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .
Troshina M.V. – Researcher.
Golovanova O.Yu. – Engineer-Physicist.
Potetnya V.I. – Sen. Res., C. Sc., Biol.
Baykuzina R.M. – Lead. Engineer.
Ulyanenko L.N. – Lead. Res., D.Sc., Biol., Prof.
Koryakin S.N. – Head of Lab, C. Sc., Biol.
Ulyanenko S.E. – Head of Dep., D.Sc., Biol. A. Tsyb MRRC.

A. Tsyb MRRC, Obninsk


In highly conformal proton therapy treatments it is very important that doses calculated with the use of the treatment planning system (TPS) and virtual absorbed doses to a tumor and surrounding tissues should coincide. This requirement is necessary to be fulfilled, in order to protect surrounding healthy organs and tissues. The purpose of the study is to estimate possibility of using chemical dosimetry for measuring an absorbed dose and verification of the computed TPS doses when dose is delivered to a target volume at one or several different angles. The high sensitivity FBX-system (Ferrous (II) sulfate – Benzoic acid v Xylenol orange) served as a dosimeter. We performed irradiations at the proton accelerator “Prometheus” (manufacturer – PROTOM, Protvino, Russia) from one and three directions (0°, 90°, 180°) in three different ways: from one direction either with one dose fraction or with several fractions of 1 Gy; and from three directions with one dose fraction, the prescribed total dose being equal for all scenarios. The dose range was 1-5 Gy. The results obtained with the FBX-dosimeter show that there are no statistically significant differences between the dose delivery methods (one or three fields, one or several dose fractions). Comparison of the proton irradiation data with the calibration curve for 60Co gamma-radiation shows significant differences, which we explain by different values of linear energy transfer for protons (LET range ~5–20 keV/μm) and 60Со gamma-radiation (~0.25-0.3 keV/μm). The data obtained allow to conclude that in the clinical and experimental dosimetry of scanning proton beams, the FBX dosimetric system can be used effectively. It also points out the necessity to consider the dose average LET in the TPS to enhance the therapy efficiency and quality assurance. However, one must preliminary calibrate the FBX dosimeter under the same proton energy-LET conditions as in the tested TPS dose distributions for successful use in clinical and experimental applications.

Key words
chemical dosimeter FBX, optical density, absorbed dose, scanning beam, proton therapy.


1. Kaprin A.D., Ulyanenko S.E. Hadron therapy – development point. Medicina: tselevye proekty – Medicine: Targeted Projects, 2016, no. 23, pp. 56-59. (In Russian).

2. Kaprin A.D., Galkin V.N., Zhavoronkov L.P., Ivanov V.K., Ivanov S.A., Romanko Yu.S. Synthesis of basic and applied research is the basis for providing high-level scientific results and their introduction in medical practice. Radiatsiya i risk – Radiation and Risk, 2017, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 26-40. (In Russian).

3. Ulyanenko S.E., Lychagin A.A., Koryakin S.N., Galkin V.N. Proton therapy complex with scanning beam "Prometheus": radiological bases and perspectives. Issledovaniya i praktika v medicine – Research and Practice in Medicine, 2017, vol. 4, no. S1, p. 107. (In Russian).

4. Ulyanenko S.E., Gulidov I.A., Lychagin A.A., Koryakin S.N., Troshina M.V., Solov`ev A.N., Beketov E.E., Isaeva E.V., Koryakina E.V., Balakin V.E., Galkin V.N., Kaprin A.D. Radiobiological features of the proton scanning beam of Russian complex "Prometeus". Radiobiologicheskie osnovy luchevoj terapii. Materialy mezhdunarodnoj konferencii – Radiobiological basis of radiation therapy. Materials of the International Conference. Obninsk, A. Tsyb MRRC, 2017, pp. 109-110. (In Russian).

5. Gulidov I.A., Galkin V.N., Gordon K.B., Gogolin D.V., Lepilina O.G., Kaprin A.D., Mardynskij Yu.S., Ulyanenko S.E. Proton therapy with an active scanning beam of tumors of the central nervous system and the base of the skull. Zlokachestvennye opukholi – Malignant Tumors, 2017, vol. 7, no. 3-S1, pp. 113-114. (In Russian).

6. Ulyanenko S.E., Lychagin A.A., Koryakin S.N., Chernukha A.E., Troshina M.V., Gulidov I.A., Solov`ev A.N., Lepilina O.G., Shemyakov A.E., Galkin V.N., Potetnya V.I. Dose and LET distribution in bioobjects under proton irradiation. Meditsinskaya fizika – Medical Physics, 2018, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 68-74. (In Russian).

7. Gupta B.L., Gomathy K.R. Consistency of ferrous sulfate – benzoic acid – xylenol orange dosimeter. Int. J. Appl. Radiat. Isot., 1974, vol. 25, no. 11-12, pp. 509-513.

8. Semwal M.K., Bansal A.K., Thakur P.K., Vidyasagar P.B. FBX aqueous chemical dosimeter for meas-urement of virtual wedge profiles. J. App. Clin. Med. Phys., 2008, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 206-210.

9. Kothawade M.B., Balraj A. Standardization of FBX dosimeter with computerized treatment planning system (TPS). Int. J. Curr. Res., 2017, vol. 9, no. 7, pp. 54520-54522.

10. Semwal M.K., Bansal A.K., Thakur P.K., Vidyasagar P.B. In-vivo (entrance) dose measurements in external beam radiotherapy with aqueous FBX dosimetry system. J. Med. Phys., 2005, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 32-35.

11. Bregadze Yu.I., Stepanov E.K., Yaryna V.P. Prikladnaya metrologiya ioniziruyushchih izluchenij [Applied metrology of ionizing radiation]. Moscow, Energoatomizdat, 1990. 264 p.

12. Upadhyay S.N., Singh J., Reddy A.R. Ferrous ammonium sulphate-benzoic acid-xylenol orange (a low-level dosimetric system). Indian J. Radiol., 1982, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 141-147.

13. Moussous O., Medjadj T., Benguerba M. FBX aqueous chemical dosimeter for measurement of dosimetric parameters. App. Radiat. Isot., 2011, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 399-402.

14. Moussous O., Medjad T., Khoudri S. Dosimetric proprieties of FBX dosimeter for high energy photon and electron beams. Pol. J. Med. Phys. Eng., 2017, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 55-59.

15. Sokolova I.K. Khimicheskie metody dozimetrii v radiobiologii [Chemical dosimetry methods in radiobiology]. Moscow, Atomizdat, 1972. 120 pp.

16. Bhat N.N., Choudhary D., Sarma A., Gupta B.L., Siddappa K. Response of an FBX dosimeter to high LET 7Li and 12C ions. Radiat. Phys. Chem., 2003, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 909-916.

17. Paganetti H. Relative biological effectiveness (RBE) values for proton beam therapy. Variations as a function of biological endpoint, dose, and linear energy transfer. Phys. Med. Biol., 2014, vol. 59, no. 22, pp. R419-R472.

18. Paganetti H. Proton relative biological effectiveness – uncertainties and opportunities. Int. J. Par. Ther., 2018, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 2-4. DOI: 10.14338/ijpt-18-00011.1.

19. Unkelbach J., Botas P., Giantsoudi D., Gorissen B., Paganetti H. Reoptimization of intensity-modulated proton therapy plans based on linear energy transfer. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys., 2016, vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 1097-1106.

Full-text article (in Russian)