Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Aug 1;98(1172):1298-1304.
doi: 10.1093/bjr/tqaf107.

Film measurements of kilovoltage x-ray percentage depth doses for different energies and field sizes

Tze Yee Lim  1 , Dershan Luo  1 , Jamshid Moradi-Kurdestany  2 , Xin Wang  1 , Ramesh Tailor  1
Affiliations

Film measurements of kilovoltage x-ray percentage depth doses for different energies and field sizes

Tze Yee Lim et al. Br J Radiol. .

Abstract

Objectives: Kilovoltage x-ray therapy, which includes superficial x-rays and orthovoltage x-rays, is particularly suited for treatments near the skin surface. Radiation dose deposition at depth is typically characterized by percentage depth dose (PDD) curves. However, PDD data are difficult to obtain in kilovoltage x-ray therapy, hence clinics often rely on British Journal of Radiology Supplement 25 (BJR-25) archival data. This study measured PDD for different energies and field sizes on the Xstrahl 300 kilovoltage x-ray therapy unit for comparison with BJR-25 data.

Methods: We irradiated EBT3 film in water using different energy and field size combinations, then, compared the acquired PDD curves with BJR-25 data. We used 75, 125, and 250 kVp beams, for 10 × 10 cm2 open field, 4 × 4 cm2 closed-ended square applicator, and open-ended circular applicators of 1.5, 2.0, 2.8, and 4.7 cm diameter.

Results: PDD for different energies and field sizes on the Xstrahl 300 kilovoltage x-ray therapy unit agreed well with BJR-25 data. The average difference between measured and BJR-25 data was -0.3 ± 1.8%; 85.9% of the individual local differences were within ±3%, 94.8% within ±4%, and 99.5% within ±5%.

Conclusions: The PDD curves presented here, together with BJR-25 data, can serve as useful comparison datasets for the commissioning of kilovoltage x-ray machines.

Advances in knowledge: Our film-based measurement technique provides high spatial resolution PDD datapoints for a modern kilovoltage x-ray unit, adding to the limited published data in the kilovoltage energy range.

Keywords: kilovoltage x-ray; orthovoltage; percentage depth dose; superficial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Setup for percentage depth dose measurements with film in water on the Xstrahl 300 kilovoltage x-ray therapy unit.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Energy-specific film calibration curves to convert net optical density to dose.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Percentage depth dose curves for 75 kVp (2.2 mm Al HVL), 125 kVp (3.5 mm Al HVL), and 250 kVp (1.3 mm Cu HVL) beams based on film measurements and compared with BJR-25 data, grouped by field sizes: (A) 10 × 10 cm2 open (no applicator), (B) 4 × 4 cm2 square applicator, (C) 1.5 cm diameter circular applicator, (D) 2.0 cm diameter circular applicator, (E) 2.8 cm diameter circular applicator, and (F) 4.7 cm diameter circular applicator.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Depth of dose penetration at various dose levels, 90% of the maximum dose (dark green), 80% of the maximum dose (light green), and 50% of the maximum dose (yellow), for 75 kVp (2.2 mm Al HVL), 125 kVp (3.5 mm Al HVL), and 250 kVp (1.3 mm Cu HVL) beams, using circular applicators of diameters 1.5 cm, 2.0 cm, 2.8 cm, and 4.7 cm.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Comparison of percentage depth doses for kilovoltage photon energies (75, 125, and 250 kVp) with those of megavoltage electron energies (6, 9, 12, 16, and 20 MeV) using a 4 × 4 cm2 square applicator.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Gianfaldoni S, Gianfaldoni R, Wollina U, Lotti J, Tchernev G, Lotti T. An overview on radiotherapy: from its history to its current applications in dermatology. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2017;5:521-525. 10.3889/oamjms.2017.122 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209-249. 10.3322/caac.21660 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cheraghi N, Cognetta A, Goldberg D. Radiation therapy in dermatology: non-melanoma skin cancer. J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16:464-469. - PubMed
    1. Likhacheva A, Awan M, Barker CA, et al. Definitive and postoperative radiation therapy for basal and squamous cell cancers of the skin: executive summary of an American society for radiation oncology clinical practice guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2020;10:8-20. 10.1016/j.prro.2019.10.014 - DOI - PubMed
    1. McGregor S, Minni J, Herold D. Superficial radiation therapy for the treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancers. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2015;8:12-14. - PMC - PubMed