# Detector response and dose calculation lateral to material interfaces for 6 MV photon beam

**Authors:** Jonas Ringholz, Otto Andreas Sauer, Sonja Wegener

PMC · DOI: 10.1002/acm2.70302 · Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics · 2025-10-21

## TL;DR

This paper studies how different detectors and dose calculation algorithms perform near material interfaces in radiation therapy.

## Contribution

The study compares detector responses and dose calculations near an aluminum cylinder to evaluate accuracy in inhomogeneous conditions.

## Key findings

- Ion chambers showed the largest dose change (2.5%) near the aluminum cylinder.
- Dose calculations from commercial systems differed up to 3% from measurements.
- Detector type significantly affects measured dose near material interfaces.

## Abstract

Dose calculation around inhomogeneities is challenging for many algorithms. A validation of dose distributions in these conditions is not straightforward, as detector response close to material interfaces is affected by the non‐equilibrium situation, the changing energy spectrum and the volume effect in a steep dose gradient.

Detector response lateral to an inhomogeneity of high density was studied, mimicking the situation of bone surrounded by soft tissue.

Profiles obtained with different detectors (diodes, ion chamber, synthetic diamond) in water in the vicinity of an aluminum cylinder were compared. Dose deposition was also calculated with different commercial treatment planning systems and algorithms as well as using Monte Carlo simulations within and lateral to the cylinder and compared to measurements.

Dose deposition in the vicinity of an inserted aluminum cylinder changes and is registered by the detectors to a different degree. The ion chamber shows the largest change irradiated with a 10×10 cm2 at 3 mm distance from the cylinder surface (2.5%), followed by the synthetic diamond (1.7%), then the unshielded (1.4%) and finally the shielded diode (1.0%). Dose calculated by different commercial dose engines differed up to 3% at that point from the detector values (Collapsed Cone).

Dose calculation near inhomogeneities depends on the used algorithm, dose measurements in the same region differ depending on the detector type used. We recommend verification of dose calculation with second type of algorithm and measurements with at least two detector types.

## Full-text entities

- **Chemicals:** water (MESH:D014867), diamond (MESH:D018130), aluminum (MESH:D000535)

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12539283/full.md

## Figures

6 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12539283/full.md

## References

47 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12539283/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12539283