Article Type: Research Article

Accepted Article
Spectral analysis of the EBT3 radiochromic films for

clinical photon and electron beams

Elsa Y. León-Marroquín1,*, Daniel J. Mulrow1,2,*, Rao Khan1,a,†, and Arash

Darafsheh1,b,†

1
Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis,

MO 63110
2
Department of Chemistry, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110

a
Electronic mail: khanrf@wustl.edu
b
Electronic mail: arash.darafsheh@wustl.edu
*
These authors contributed equally to this work.
†
Senior authorship is shared between these individuals.

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not
been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may
lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as
doi: 10.1002/mp.13330
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
 Abstract
Accepted Article Purpose: To investigate the spectral response of the EBT3 radiochromic films to different

beam qualities for radiation therapy dosimetry. Dose, dose rate, and inter-batch dependencies

on the spectral response of the films are investigated as well.

Methods: Pieces of EBT3 films placed between layers of solid water phantoms were

irradiated with 6 and 15 MV photon beams, 6 and 10 MV-FFF photon beams, and 6 and 20

MeV electron beams at dose levels between 0.4-50 Gy. Net absorbance was measured as a

function of wavelength from the spectra acquired in the wavelength range of 400-800 nm

using a fiber-coupled spectrometer and broadband light source.

Results: No significant change was observed in the absorption spectra of the EBT3 films

irradiated with the same amount of dose using different beam qualities. Also, no spectral

change with dose rate was observed. The measured net absorbance per Gy was independent

of beam quality in the 1-50 Gy dose range. Slight differences in the spectral shape and

absorption band positions were observed in film samples from different batches. The net

absorbance spectra showed two absorption bands centered around 634-636 nm (primary) and

583-585 nm (secondary). However, depending on the film batch, for doses above a certain

level the primary absorption band appears to “split” into two bands centered around ~624-

628 and ~641-645 nm.

Conclusions: The spectral shape of the EBT3 radiochromic films irradiated with photons

(including FFF) and electron beams is beam quality and dose rate independent; however it

varies with dose level, batch, and spectroscopy system used.

Keywords: Radiochromic film, EBT3, absorption spectroscopy, film dosimetry.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 1. INTRODUCTION
Accepted Article Radiochromic films have been widely used in radiation therapy dosimetry and quality

assurance (QA), especially to compare planned and measured dose distributions [1-6]. Such

films have been used for in vivo and small field dosimetry as well as in high dose-gradient

regions and other challenging scenarios owing to their high spatial resolution, water

equivalency, and ease of handling [7-16].

Radiochromic film response to ionizing radiation is manifested as a change in color, due

to increase in the concentration of light absorbing polymers, which is characterized by the

optical density (OD) or absorbance (A) [17]. The absorbance measured using an optical

system can then be correlated to the radiation dose. In clinical dosimetry, a high-resolution

flatbed scanner [18, 19], e.g. EPSON 10000XL, is typically used to establish the dose

response relationship [2, 3, 7], commonly called a calibration-curve [17]. The measured

optical density is a convolution of the densitometer light source emission spectrum, the film

absorption spectrum, and the spectral sensitivity of the densitometer’s detector [20].

Accurate knowledge of the absorption spectrum of the radiochromic films and its

behavior with dose helps to better understand their response to radiation [21]. The optical

absorption spectra of the EBT, EBT2, and EBT3 radiochromic films have been studied for

their optical properties [22-30]. In most of the existing literature it has been shown that the

irradiation of these films results in two principal absorption bands centered at 636±3 nm and

585±2 nm. However, some groups have reported a third band with a lower intensity centered

at 560±6 nm [24-27]. The absorption spectrum has been modeled as a weighted sum of

Lorentzian functions corresponding to the electronic and vibrionic transitions of all polymer

color phases and of all conjugation lengths [25-28].

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 Previous studies have investigated film absorption spectra only for 6 MV x-rays [23-26,
Accepted Article 28, 29], cobalt-60 [27], and solar UV radiation [22]. Typically spectroscopic studies are done

with a spectrophotometer using a monochromator to supply light to the sample. The

monochromator sequentially creates narrow band light from a broadband light source and the

detector records the intensity of the transmitted light corresponding to the narrowband probed

wavelength.

An in-depth survey of literature reveals that the spectral analysis of radiochromic films

irradiated with electron beams, Flattening Filter-Free (FFF) photon beams, and photon beams

of energies other than 6 MV have not been reported and they have not been rigorously

investigated from spectral perspective. The aim of this work was to investigate the spectral

response of the EBT3 radiochromic films to megavoltage photon and electron beam

irradiations with various beam qualities for radiation therapy dosimetry. We used 6 MV, 6

MV FFF, 10 MV-FFF, and 15 MV clinical photon beams, and 6 MeV and 20 MeV electron

beams to characterize the absorption spectra of the EBT3 films in a wide range of clinical

scenarios. In this work a broadband light, which better mimics the light sources typically used

for film dosimetry, is passed through the sample, allowing all wavelengths to interact with the

sample simultaneously. The spectrometer records all light signals simultaneously and

consequently the acquired spectra are sensitive to optical processes that may lead to

wavelength shifting. The impact of dose, dose rate, and inter-batch dependencies on the

spectral response of the films were also investigated.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Accepted Article 2. A. Radiochromic films

Films from three batches of EBT3 Gafchromic (Ashland Inc., Bridgewater, NJ), batch #1 –lot

number 11091602 (expiration date November 2018), batch #2 –lot number 06281701

(expiration date June 2019), and batch #3 –lot number 06181801 (expiration date June 2020),

were cut into 5×5 cm2 pieces. Film pieces were marked on their corner to indicate their

orientation. Films were used, handled, and stored in accordance with the manufacturer’s

recommendations and the recommendations outlined in the AAPM TG-55 report [17].

2. B. Spectral response

Spectral response of the films was characterized by the absorbance ( ) and net absorbance

( ) for the non-irradiated and irradiated films, respectively.The absorbance is defined as

()
() = − ()
, (1)

where () is the transmitted intensity of the non-irradiated film sample and () is the

transmitted intensity without any film sample.

The net absorbance is defined using the following equation:

()
() = − ()
, (2)

where () is the transmitted intensity of the irradiated film sample. It should be noted that

dark current spectra ( ()) were obtained by collecting spectra with the spectrometer’s

input aperture covered, and were subtracted from each raw spectrum ( ()) acquired, i.e.

() = , () − , ().

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 2.B.1.Non-irradiated films
Accepted Article The geometry of the spectroscopy setup is illustrated in Fig. 1. Spectral response of the films

was measured using a fiber-coupled spectrometer (WP-VIS-R-S-100, Wasatch Photonics,

Durham, NC) over 400-800 nm spectral range with 2.5 nm spectral resolution. A deuterium-

tungsten halogen lamp (DH-2000, Ocean Optics) was used as a light source. The spectra were

acquired while both deuterium and halogen sources were simultaneously turned on, to

provide adequate light intensity over the visible spectrum. A set of lenses were arranged to

optically couple the light to a fused silica optical fiber (FT600EMT, Thorlabs Inc., Newton,

NJ) with ~0.6 mm core diameter and 0.39 NA. The light output from the source was

collimated by a plano-convex lens (LA1422, Thorlabs Inc.) to create ~1-cm-diameter spot on

the film samples. Another identical lens was used to collect the light passing through the film

and couple that to the fiber. Both lenses have the following properties: focal length = 40 mm,

diameter = 25.4 mm, and thickness along central axis = 6.4 mm. The film samples were

placed in a holder, ensuring they were perpendicular to the optical beam direction to avoid

introducing any possible systematic uncertainty in the measurement of the net absorbance due

to their orientation. The fiber was carefully placed near the focal point of the second lens to

collect maximum amount of light that passes through the film. One film sample was used for

each irradiation scenario. Since the non-uniformity of the EBT3 films has been shown to be

minimal [31, 32], the spectra were measured over 5 different regions of interest (ROIs) on the

film, as schematically shown as light spots in Fig. 1(b). A distance of ~5 mm from the edges

of the film samples, affected by the strain artifacts due to the cutting process, was avoided in

the measurements. Five spectra were used for data analysis for each spot, each of which was

a median of 50 collected spectra with an acquisition time of 100 ms.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 In order to verify the inherent stability of our spectrometer, 50 spectra of the light source
Accepted Article were acquired and < 0.1% variation in the spectra was observed, which is within the

manufacturer’s specification of the light source (output variations ≤ 0.1% per hour at 254 nm

for deuterium and ≤ 0.1% per hour at 700 nm for tungsten halogen).

Similarly the measurement uncertainty arising from the non-uniformity of the film in the

absorbance spectra was determined by acquiring 50 spectra in each of the five ROIs (Figure

1(b). Therefore, a total of 250 spectra for each film sample were obtained and their standard

deviation was calculated and used as error bars in the plots. This resulted in <1% intra-batch

variation in the spectra for non-irradiated films.

2.B.2. Irradiated films

Spectral response of the irradiated films was measured 48 hours post-irradiation. For dose,

dose rate, and inter-batch studies of the irradiated films, ROI was a single spot with ~1 cm

diameter in the film’s center. For that spot, 50 spectra were collected, each with 100 ms

acquisition time, and the median of those spectra was used for data analysis. In order to

compare the film response to different beam qualities and dose levels, the net absorbance per

gray ( / ) was measured. The values corresponding to the peak absorption

wavelengths were divided by the dose.

2. C. Irradiation setup

The irradiation setup for photon and electron beams is shown in Figs. 2(a) and 2(b),

respectively. For photon irradiations, source to surface distance (SSD) was 100 cm, field size

at isocenter was 10×10 cm2, and the film samples were positioned at a depth of 5cm in a solid

water phantom (Standard Imaging). A total thickness of 15 cm backscatter solid water

phantoms were placed underneath the film samples in all experiments. For each electron

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 beam, SSD was 100 cm, the 15×15 cm2 electron applicator was used, and the total thickness
Accepted Article of solid water above the film samples was equal to the corresponding depth of maximum

dose, dmax (1.4 cm for 6 MeV and 2.6 cm for 20 MeV beam). A Varian TrueBeamTM linear

accelerator was used for irradiations.

2.C.1. Beam quality dependence

Film pieces from batch #3 were irradiated using 6 MV, 6 MV-FFF, 10 MV-FFF, and 15 MV

photon beams, and 6 MeV and 20 MeV electron beams. The PDD values at 10 cm for the

photon energies used in this work are 66.4, 63.5, 73.5, and 76.7%, respectively. The values of

R50 for the electron energies used in this work are 2.3 and 8.2 cm, respectively. Eight

different doses levels 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0, 10.0, 20.0, 30.0, and 50.0 Gy were delivered for each

beam quality. A nominal dose rate of 600 MU/min was used for 6 MV, 6 MV-FFF, and 15

MV photon beams, and 6 MeV and 20 MeV electron beams beam. For the 10 MV-FFF

photon beam, 2400 MU/min dose rate was used. The film response defined as ratio of Net

Absorbance and delivered doses (Gy) was determined for each beam quality.

2.C.2. Dose dependence

In order to study the influence of various dose on the film spectra, film pieces from batch #1

and batch #3 were irradiated at different dose levels using a 6 MV photon beam and 6 MeV

electron beam separately. Ten dose levels in the range 0.4-17.2 Gy were delivered for the 6

MV photon beam. For the 6 MeV electron beam, films were irradiated with nine dose levels

in the range 0.5-15.0 Gy.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 2.C.3. Dose rate dependence
Accepted Article Film samples from batch #1 were separately irradiated with five dose levels in the range 0.4-

18.1 Gy at two different dose rates using 6 MV-FFF (600 MU/min and 1400 MU/min) and 10

MV-FFF (1200 MU/min and 2400 MU/min) photon beams.

2.C.4. Inter-batch dependence

Film pieces from all batches were irradiated using 6 MV-FFF and 10 MV-FFF photon beams

at 1400 MU/min and 2400 MU/min dose rates, respectively. The irradiations were done at the

five dose levels in the range 0.4-18.1 Gy.

3. RESULTS

3. A. Zero dose film response

The absorbance spectrum of non-irradiated EBT3 film samples from three different

batches, measured using Eq. (1), is presented in Fig. 3. These spectra show the typical two

absorption bands characteristic of EBT film models [22-29]. The highest absorption band

(primary) is centered around 635-637 nm and another absorption band (secondary) is

centered around 583-585 nm. Interestingly, a third absorption band centered at 548 nm with

the absorbance value 0.58 is also observed for non-irradiated film from batch #1, as shown in

Fig. 3. It can be seen in Fig. 3 that there exists an inter-batch difference in the absorbance

spectrum of the films. Relative to batch #1, an absorbance variation of 16% and 6%

corresponding to primary and secondary bands, respectively, was observed for batch #2.

Using same reference, the absorbance variation of 38% and 26% corresponding to primary

and secondary bands, was observed for batch #3.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 3. B. Beam quality dependence
Accepted Article Figure 4 shows a set of typical absorbance spectra of films from batch #3 irradiated with 6

MV photons. Similar results were obtained for other beam qualities used in this work.

In order to determine the Net Absorbance (Net A), transmission spectra were divided by

the transmitted intensity of the non-irradiated film sample according to Eq. (2). The spectral

response of the films from batch #3 irradiated with different beam qualities and doses is

presented in Fig. 5. It can be seen that the net absorbance spectra remains identical for the

films irradiated with the same amount of dose across different beam qualities. In Fig. 5, it can

be seen that the net absorbance spectra of the irradiated films show only two peaks centered

at 636 nm and 585 nm for doses up to 10.0 Gy. However, at 20.0 Gy the absorption band at

636 nm appears to “split” into two bands. In section 3.C we will describe this phenomenon in

more detail.

Figure 6 shows the film response, net absorbance per gray ( / ), for different

beam qualities calculated for the primary (centered at 636 nm) and secondary (centered at

585 nm) absorption bands. The value of / decreases as the dose increases due to the

fact that the film absorbance increases non-linearly with the radiation dose. It is worth noting

that the primary and secondary absorption bands have different / values. Compared

to the primary absorption band, the / decreases by 52 %, 48%, 40%, 30%, 18%, 6%,

2.5%, and 0.7% (average) for 0.5 Gy, 1 Gy, 2 Gy, 5 Gy, 10 Gy, 20 Gy, 30 Gy, and 50 Gy,

respectively, for the secondary absorption band.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 Small deviations were found in the / of the films irradiated using different beam
Accepted Article qualities for dose levels in 0.5-50 Gy range when the primary absorption band is used to

measure the film response. Relative to 6MV, variations < 2% in the / were observed

for 6 MV-FFF, 10 MV-FFF, 15 MV, 6 MeV, and 20 MeV. However, when the secondary

band is used, variations < 3% in the / were observed for rest of the beam qualities

compared to the 6 MV case from 1-50 Gy. At low dose of 0.5 Gy, the / variations

were < 3.4%, < 5.3%, < 3.2%, < 4.3%, and < 6.5% for 6 MV-FFF, 10 MV-FFF, 15 MV, 6

MeV, respectively, compared to the 6 MV case [see Fig. 6(b)] measured on the secondary

absorption band.

3. C. Dose dependence of spectrum

Figures 7(a-f) show the spectral response of the films from batch #1 and batch #3 irradiated at

several dose levels in the range 0.4-20 Gy using a 6 MV photon and a 6 MeV electron beam.

An increase in the net absorbance is observed with increasing the dose for both photon and

electron irradiation. Remarkably, we observed that the shape of the net absorbance spectrum

is different for low and high dose levels. Additionally, inter-batch differences in the spectral

response were more evident. From Fig. 7, a dose threshold for low doses at ∼5 Gy for batch

#1 and ~10 Gy for batch #3 can be established. For low doses, two intense absorption bands

centered at 636 nm (primary) and 585 nm (secondary) are observed, see Fig. 7(c) and 7(f).

The position of these bands is maintained for all beam qualities at doses < 5 Gy for batch #1

and doses < 10 Gy for batch #3. However, for high doses ( > 5 Gy for batch #1 and > 10 Gy

for batch #3), the primary absorption band appears to “split” into two bands; the spectral

distance of these split bands increases with dose, as it can be seen in Fig. 7(a) and 7(b). For

example at ~15 Gy dose the separation between the split peaks is ~22 nm for batch #1, see

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 Fig. 7(c). For batch #3, the separation between the split peaks is 13 nm at 15 Gy, see Fig.
Accepted Article 7(f).

Our results show that the position of the secondary absorption band for batch #1 slightly

varies (red-shifted) with dose. For example, ~4 nm red-shift is seen at ~15 Gy, see figure

7(c). However, the position of the secondary absorption band for batch #3 remains unchanged

with dose.

3. D. Dose rate dependence

The spectral response of the films from batch #1 irradiated with 6 MV-FFF and 10 MV-FFF

photon beams at two different dose rates are shown in Figs. 8(a) and 8(b), respectively. No

dose rate dependency was found in the net absorbance spectra of the films.

3. E. Inter-batch dependence

Spectral response of the film samples from three different batches, irradiated with a 6 MV-

FFF and a 10 MV-FFF photon beam, are presented in Fig. 9. Inter-batch variations in net

absorbance were observed. For low doses (<5 Gy for batch #1, <8 Gy for batch #2 and <10

Gy for batch #3), the inter-batch variations were ~8%, on average, for both beam qualities in

batch #2 and batch #3 compared to batch #1. For high doses (>5 Gy for batch #1, >8 Gy for

batch #2 and >10 Gy for batch #3), the spectral differences are not uniform, see Fig. 9.

Inter-batch differences on the position of the absorption bands were also observed. The

red/blue-shift was up to 4 nm for films irradiated with 10 MV-FFF photon beam at 1.81 Gy

for primary and secondary absorption bands.

It can also be seen that the threshold dose to cause the “splitting” appearance of the

primary band is higher for batch #3 compared to that in batch #1 and batch #2. For example,

in Fig. 9(e,f), the “splitting” at 8.41 Gy can be seen in batch #1, while it is not visible for

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 batch #2 and batch #3. This may explain why the “splitting” have not been observed in
Accepted Article previous studies by other groups.

It should be mentioned that for irradiated EBT3 films, Villarreal-Barajas and Khan

reported inter-batch differences of ~1% in film response measure using a flatbed scanner

[33]. It was suggested that the difference may be associated to the changes in the composition

and thickness of the film active layer during the manufacturing process between batches.

However, in our work, we found ~7-17% difference in net absorbance of irradiated EBT3

films measured using a spectroscopy system which may manifest as inter-batch variation in

optical density as others reported.

4. DISCUSSION

The spectral shape of the films irradiated with a given dose using different beam qualities

remains similar for films from all three batches studied. For low doses, the net absorbance

spectra of the irradiated films shows two peaks centered at 636 nm and 585 nm. For high

doses, however, the absorption band at 636 nm appears to flatten or “split” into two bands.

The absorption band at 585 nm can be slightly red-shifted, as we observed in films irradiated

at ~15 Gy for batch #1. Previous studies have not reported this “splitting” observation [19-

26]. However, it should be noted that in those studies a monochromatic light source was used

to measure the absorption spectra. In the present study we used a broadband light source,

similar to the light source used in the study by Callens et al. [34]. However, they did not use

an un-irradiated film as a reference, i.e. in the denominator in Eq. (2), to obtain the net

absorption spectra. Instead, they created a “background” reference spectrum from an un-

irradiated film by replacing the values in 500-680 nm wavelength range by a fourth order

polynomial. In the present study, an actual un-irradiated film spectrum was used as the

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 reference to obtain the net absorption spectra. When an un-irradiated film is used as a
Accepted Article reference, this creates a dip in the net absorption spectrum creating the appearance of the

“splitting” observed in this work. This difference may account for why we are observing

“splitting” in the primary absorption band. Nevertheless, in both works a broadening and

flattening of the primary absorption band can be seen as the radiation dose increases.

To develop further insights into the observed “split” anomaly, we measured Net

Absorbance for a small subset of films using a Cary 5000 UV-Vis-NIR (Agilent, Santa Clara,

CA) spectrometer, which uses a monochromatic light source for absorbance measurement. As

can be seen in Fig. 10, the broadening or splitting is not observed in the spectra when a

monochromic light source is used. This may provide some explanation for the

splitting/broadening appearance of the spectra for high dose levels films presented in this

work and the work of Callens et al. [34].

Further work is required to explain this observed difference in the spectra measured with

different systems. In all of our measurements, we assured that there is enough signal in the

transmission spectra used for absorbance measurement. We hypothesize that the film is

absorbing light in the near-UV and blue region, and weakly emitting light at a higher

wavelength that due to the logarithmic nature of the optical density, would create

flattening/split behavior in the observed absorption spectrum. The choice to use a broadband

light source in our work was to simulate the light source used in a flatbed scanner. We

repeated our measurements with the deuterium-tungsten light source turned off and still

observed the splitting/flattening effects using the halogen light source. Another possibility is

that the transmitted light from the broadband source may be Raman scattered in the second

PMMA layer of the film resulting in light that would have been normally absorbed by the

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 active layer. Further investigation is needed to confirm if emission of light or Raman
Accepted Article scattering is responsible for the flattening/split appearance of the absorbance spectra.

We used an un-irradiated film as a reference to obtain the net absorbance in order to

quantify the polymerization due only to the received ionizing radiation on the films. This

“saturation” effect in the primary absorption band (centered at 636 nm) is in qualitative

agreement with previous observations that the film sensitivity decreases with increasing the

dose. It has been reported in the literature that when a flatbed scanner is used as a readout

system for radiochromic films, the sensitivity of the film measurements depends on the color

channel and the dose level of the films [35]. For example, for EBT3 films, it is shown that the

red channel has the highest sensitivity when the dose level is < 6 Gy; when the dose level is >

6 Gy the green channel has highest sensitivity [28]. This result is confirmed by our work,

when the EBT3 film response is measured using a spectrometer and broadband light source.

The variations of the / between primary and secondary absorption bands is higher

up to ~5 Gy. For doses >5 Gy, the / values for both absorption bands are very

similar. However, another study reports that the optimal dose range to use the red channel is

up to 10 Gy when the EBT3 film is analyzed using a flatbed scanner [31]. These variation in

the optimal range reported for the EBT3 film is related with the inter-batch differences found

in our study. Since the “saturation” effect in the primary absorption band (centered at 636

nm) starts at different dose levels for different batches used.

The changes in the spectral response of irradiated films from different batches could be

associated to the slight changes in the active layers of the films during fabrication processes.

These differences suggest that a per batch film response characterization may still be required

in order to achieve an accurate measure of the film response.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 The film sensitivity is limited by the optical system used for measuring the film response
Accepted Article [27, 29]. It has been shown that using a narrow-bandwidth beam (e.g. LED) or a

monochromatic optical system (e.g. laser) working around the absorbance bands of the films

to characterize the films [36, 37] can lead to an improved sensitivity and accuracy as well as a

greater dynamic range in the film response measurement. However, caution must be

exercised in selecting such optical systems due to the dose-dependent behavior of the spectral

response of the films as shown in this work.

5. CONCLUSIONS

The spectral response of the EBT3 radiochromic films to megavoltage photon and electron

beam irradiations was investigated for radiation therapy dosimetry. The spectral response of

the EBT3 radiochromic films and the / are beam quality and dose rate independent

for megavoltage radiation. This independence means that the results of the spectral response

characterization for a particular beam quality are valid for any beam quality irradiation

including flattening filter free beams.

The spectral response is batch and dose dependent; at high doses the primary absorption

band appears to splits into two bands when a broad band light source is used to acquire the

spectra. This dose dependence is important to take into account when choosing light sources

and optical readout system for film dosimetry. The batch dependence of the response

suggests that a batch-based film response characterization is required to ensure accuracy for

clinical dosimetry.

The results obtained in this study show the importance of the spectral response

characterization of the radiochromic films when determining their potential uses.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Accepted Article This work was supported by the Department of Radiation Oncology at the Washington

University School of Medicine. Dr. León-Marroquín acknowledges the financial support

from the CONACYT Mexico for her post-doctoral studies at the Washington University

School of Medicine.

DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 REFERENCES
Accepted Article [1] I. J. Das, [Radiochromic film: Role and applications in radiation dosimetry] CRC Press Boca
Raton, FL (2017).
[2] J. E. Morales, M. Butson, S. B. Crowe, R. Hill, and J. V. Trapp, “An experimental extrapolation
technique using the Gafchromic EBT3 film for relative output factor measurements in small
x-ray fields,” Medical Physics, 43(8), 4687-4692 (2016).
[3] C. Fiandra, M. Fusella, F. R. Giglioli, A. R. Filippi, C. Mantovani, U. Ricardi, and R. Ragona,
“Comparison of Gafchromic EBT2 and EBT3 for patient-specific quality assurance: Cranial
stereotactic radiosurgery using volumetric modulated arc therapy with multiple noncoplanar
arcs,” Medical Physics, 40(8), 082105 (2013).
[4] C. Chen, S. Tang, D. Mah, and M. Chan, “SU-E-T-286: Dose Verification of Spot-Scanning
Proton Beam Using GafChromic EBT3 Film,” Medical Physics, 42(6), 3399-3399 (2015).
[5] A. Chu, W. Feng, H. Lincoln, F. Su, and R. Nath, “SU-E-T-118: Small Dynamic Field Dosimetry
by Gfachromic Film (EBT3) and 2D-Array Diode,” Medical Physics, 40(6), 230-231 (2013).
[6] N. Corradini and S. Presilla, “SU-E-T-58: Submillimeter Dose Measurement with Gafchromic
EBT2 and EBT3 Films,” Medical Physics, 40(6), 216-216 (2013).
[7] A. L. Palmer, P. Di Pietro, S. Alobaidli, F. Issa, S. Doran, D. Bradley, and A. Nisbet,
“Comparison of methods for the measurement of radiation dose distributions in high dose
rate (HDR) brachytherapy: Ge-doped optical fiber, EBT3 Gafchromic film, and PRESAGER
radiochromic plastic,” Medical Physics, 40(6), 061707 (2013).
[8] D. Cusumano, M. L. Fumagalli, M. Marchetti, L. Fariselli, and E. De Martin, “Dosimetric
verification of stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic radiotherapy dose distributions using
Gafchromic EBT3,” Medical Dosimetry, 40, 226-231 (2015).
[9] A. L. Palmer, A. Dimitriadis, A. Nisbet, and C. H. Clark, “Evaluation of Gafchromic EBT-XD film,
with comparison to EBT3 film, and application in high dose radiotherapy verification,”
Physics in Medicine and Biology, 60, 8741-8752 (2015).
[10] I. Ali, S. Ahmad, S. Joel, and J. F. Williamson, “Optimal densitometry wavelengths that
maximize radiochromic film sensitivity while minimizing OD growth and temperature
sensitivity artifacts,” Journal of X-Ray Science and Technology, 17, 61-73 (2009).
[11] I. Ali, J. F. Williamson, C. Costescu, and J. F. Dempsey, “Dependence of radiochromic film
response kinetics on fractionated doses,” Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 62, 609-617
(2005).
[12] Y. Le, I. Ali, J. F. Dempsey, and J. F. Williamson, “Prospects for quantitative two-dimensional
radiochromic film dosimetry for low dose-rate brachytherapy sources,” Medical Physics,
33(12), 4622-4634 (2006).
[13] J. I. Monroe, J. F. Dempsey, J. A. Dorton, S. Mutic, J. B. Stubbs, J. Markman, and J. F.
Williamson, “Experimental validation of dose calculation algorithms for the GliaSite™ RTS, a
Novel 125I liquid-filled balloon brachytherapy applicator,” Medical Physics, 28(1), 73-85
(2001).
[14] Y. Zhu, A. S. Kirov, V. Mishra, A. S. Meigooni, and J. F. Williamson, “Quantitative evaluation
of radiochromic film response for two-dimensional dosimetry,” Medical Physics, 24(2), 223-
231 (1997).
[15] Y. León, D. Mulrow, R. Khan, and A. Darafsheh, “Spectral analysis of the EBT3 radiochromic
films for clinical photon and electron beams,” Medical Physics, 45(6), E311-E311 (2018).
[16] S. Devic, N. Tomic, and D. Lewis, “Reference radiochromic film dosimetry: Review of
technical aspects,” Physica Medica, 32, 541-556 (2016).
[17] A. Niroomand-Rad, C. R. Blackwell, B. M. Coursey, K. P. Gall, J. M. Galvin, W. L. McLaughlin,
A. S. Meigooni, R. Nath, J. E. Rodgers, and C. G. Soares, “Radiochromic film dosimetry:
Recommendations of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 55,” Medical Physics,
25(11), 2093-2115 (1998).

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 [18] J. F. Dempsey, D. A. Low, S. Mutic, J. Markman, A. S. Kirov, G. H. Nussbaum, and J. F.
Williamson, “Validation of a precision radiochromic film dosimetry system for quantitative
Accepted Article two-dimensional imaging of acute exposure dose distributions,” Medical Physics, 27(10),
2462-2475 (2000).
[19] B. D. Lynch, J. Kozelka, M. K. Ranade, J. G. Li, W. E. Simon, and J. F. Dempsey, “Important
considerations for radiochromic film dosimetry with flatbed CCD scanners and EBT
GAFCHROMIC® film,” Medical Physics, 33(12), 4551-4556 (2006).
[20] S. Devic, J. Seuntjens, G. Hegyi, E. B. Podgorsak, C. G. Soares, A. S. Kirov, I. Ali, J. F.
Williamson, and A. Elizondo, “Dosimetric properties of improved GafChromic films for seven
different digitizers,” Medical Physics, 31(9), 2392-2401 (2004).
[21] L. E. Reinstein, G. R. Gluckman, and H. I. Amols, “Predicting optical densitometer response as
a function of light source characteristics for radiochromic film dosimetry,” Medical Physics,
24(12), 1935-1942 (1997).
[22] E. T. Butson, P. K. N. Yu, and M. J. Butson, “Solar ultraviolet radiation response of EBT2
Gafchromic, radiochromic film,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, 58, N287-N294 (2013).
[23] M. J. Butson, T. Cheung, P. K. N. Yu, and H. Alnawaf, “Dose and absorption spectra response
of EBT2 Gafchromic film to high energy x-rays,” Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences
in Medicine, 32(4), 196-202 (2009).
[24] M. J. Butson, T. Cheung, and P. K. N. Yu, “Absorption spectra variations of EBT radiochromic
film from radiation exposure,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, 50(13), N135-N140 (2005).
[25] M. Callens, W. Crijns, V. Simons, I. De Wolf, T. Depuydt, F. Maes, K. Haustermans, J. D’hooge,
E. D’Agostino, M. Wevers, H. Pfeiffer, and K. Van Den Abeele, “A spectroscopic study of the
chromatic properties of GafChromic™ EBT3 films,” Medical Physics, 43(3), 1156-1166 (2016).
[26] S. Devic, N. Tomic, Z. Pang, J. Seuntjens, E. B. Podgorsak, and C. G. Soares, “Absorption
spectroscopy of EBT model GAFCHROMIC™ film,” Medical Physics, 34(1), 112 (2007).
[27] S. Devic, S. Aldelaijan, H. Mohammed, N. Tomic, L.-H. Liang, F. DeBlois, and J. Seuntjens,
“Absorption spectra time evolution of EBT-2 model GAFCHROMIC™ film,” Medical Physics,
37(5), 2207 (2010).
[28] E. Y. León-Marroquín, M. A. Camacho-Lopez, O. A. García-Garduno, J. A. Herrera-Gonzalez, J.
E. Villarreal-Barajas, R. Gutierrez-Fuentes, and R. Contreras-Bulnes, “Spectral analysis of the
EBT3 radiochromic film irradiated with 6 MV X-ray radiation,” Radiation Measurements, 89,
82-88 (2016).
[29] J. A. Mirza, H. Park, S.-Y. Park, and S.-J. Ye, “Use of radiochromic film as a high-spatial
resolution dosimeter by Raman spectroscopy,” Medical Physics, 43(8), 4520 (2016).
[30] T. Cheung, M. J. Butson, and P. K. N. Yu, “Post-irradiation colouration of Gafchromic EBT
radiochromic film,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, 50, N281-N285 (2005).
[31] V. C. Borca, M. Pasquino, G. Russo, P. Grosso, D. Cante, P. Sciacero, G. Girelli, M. R. La Porta,
and S. Tofani, “Dosimetric characterization and use of GAFCHROMIC EBT3 film for IMRT dose
verification,” Journal of Applied clinical Medical Physics, 14(2), 158-171 (2013).
[32] E. Y. León Marroquin, J. A. Herrera González, M. A. Camacho López, J. E. Villarreal Barajas,
and O. A. García-Garduño, “Evaluation of the uncertainty in an EBT3 film dosimetry system
utilizing net optical density,” Journal of Applied clinical Medical Physics, 17(5), 466-481
(2016).
[33] J. E. Villarreal-Barajas and R. F. H. Khan, “Energy response of EBT3 radiochromic films:
implications for dosimetry in kilovoltage range,” Journal of Applied clinical Medical Physics,
15(1), 331-338 (2014).
[34] M. B. Callens, W. Crijns, T. Depuydt, K. Haustermans, F. Maes, E. D’Agostino, M. Wevers, H.
Pfeiffer, and K. Van Den Abeele, “Modeling the dose dependence of the vis-absorption
spectrum of EBT3 GafChromicTM films,” Medical Physics, 44(6), 2532-2543 (2017).
[35] S. Devic, N. Tomic, C. G. Soares, and E. B. Podgorsak, “Optimizing the dynamic range
extension of a radiochromic film dosimetry system,” Medical Physics, 39(2), 429-437 (2009).

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 [36] C. G. Hammer, B. S. Rosen, J. M. Fagerstrom, W. S. Culberson, and L. DeWerd, “Experimental
investigation of GafChromic® EBT3 intrinsic energy dependence with kilovoltage x rays,
Accepted Article 137Cs, and 60Co,” Medical Physics, 45(1), 448-459 (2017).
[37] P. Lindsay, A. Rink, M. Ruschin, and D. Jaffray, “Investigation of energy dependence of EBT
and EBT-2 Gafchromic film,” Medical Physics, 37(2), 571 (2010).

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

 Figure captions:
Accepted Article FIG. 1. (a) Schematic of the experimental setup used to measure the absorption spectra of the
EBT3 radiochromic films, (b) ROI distribution over the film surface. Dashed line indicates
the 5 mm distance from the film edges that was avoided in the measurements.

FIG. 2. Geometry of the irradiation setup for (a) all photon and (b) 20 MeV electron beam
irradiation.

FIG. 3. Absorption spectra of un-irradiated films from three different batches.

FIG. 4. Absorption spectra of EBT3 films irradiated at various dose levels for 6 MV photon
beam.

FIG. 5. Spectral response of the EBT3 radiochromic films (batch #3) irradiated with photon
(a) 6 MV, (b) 6 MV-FFF, (c) 10 MV-FFF, (d) 15 MV, and electron (e) 6 MeV, and (f) 20
MeV beams.

FIG. 6. Net absorbance per gray of the EBT3 radiochromic films for different beam qualities.
(a) Primary absorption band and (b) Secondary absorption band.

FIG. 7. Spectral response of the EBT3 radiochromic films for different dose levels. For batch
#1: (a) 6 MV photon beam; (b) 6 MeV electron beam; (c) Absorption band positions for films
irradiated at 2 Gy and 15 Gy using a 6 MeV electron beam. For batch #3: (d) 6 MV photon
beam; (e) 6 MeV electron beam; (f) Absorption band positions for films irradiated at 2 Gy
and 15 Gy using a 6 MeV electron beam.

FIG. 8. Spectral response of the EBT3 radiochromic films at two different dose rates. (a) 6
MV-FFF photon beam, and (b) 10 MV-FFF photon beam.

FIG. 9. Spectral response of the EBT3 radiochromic film for batch #1, batch #2, and batch
#3: (a) 6 MV-FFF photon beam; (b) 10 MV-FFF photon beam; (c,e) 6 MV-FFF beam plotted
at a different scale for better visualization; (d,f) 10 MV-FFF beam plotted at a different scale
for better visualization.

FIG. 10. Spectral response of the EBT3 radiochromic film from batch #3 irradiated with 6
MV photons measured using a broadband light source and a monochromatic light source.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.