Movement of tumours, mostly by respiration, has been a major problem for treating lung cancer, liver tumours and other locations in the abdomen and thorax. Organ motion is indeed one component of geometrical uncertainties that includes delineation and target definition uncertainties, microscopic disease and setup errors. At present, minimising motion seems to be the easiest to implement in clinical practice. If combined with adaptive approaches to correct for gradual anatomical variations, it may be a practical strategy. Other approaches such as repainting and tracking could increase the accuracy of proton therapy delivery, but advanced 4D solutions are needed. Moreover, there is a need to perform clinical studies to investigate which approach is the best in a given clinical situation. The good news is that existing and emerging technology and treatment planning systems as will without doubt lead in the forthcoming future to practical solutions to tackle intra-fraction motion in proton therapy. These developments may also improve motion management in photon therapy as well.

Purpose: The integration of auto‐segmentation and automated treatment planning methods on a fast‐rotating O‐ring linac may improve the time efficiency of online adaptive radiotherapy workflows. This study investigates whether automated treatment planning of prostate SBRT with focal boosting on the O‐ring linac could generate plans that are of similar quality as those obtained through manual planning on clinical C‐arm linacs.Methods: For 20 men with prostate cancer, reference treatment plans were generated on a TrueBeam STx C‐arm linac with HD120 MLC and a TrueBeam C‐arm linac with Millennium 120 MLC using 6 MV flattened dual arc VMAT. Manual planning on the Halcyon fast‐rotating O‐ring linac was performed using 6 MV FFF dual arc VMAT (HA2‐DL10) and triple arc VMAT (HA3‐DL10) to investigate the performance of the dual‐layer MLC system. Automated planning was performed for triple arc VMAT on the Halcyon linac (ET3‐DL10) using the automated planning algorithms of Ethos Treatment Planning. The prescribed dose was 35 Gy to the prostate and 30 Gy to the seminal vesicles in five fractions. The iso‐toxic focal boost to the intraprostatic tumor nodule(s) was aimed to receive up to 50 Gy. Plan deliverability was verified using portal image dosimetry measurements.Results: Compared to the C‐arm linacs, ET3‐DL10 shows increased seminal vesicles PTV coverage (D_99%) and reduced high‐dose spillage to the bladder (V_37Gy) and urethra (D_0.035cc) but this came at the cost of increased high‐dose spillage to the rectum (V_38Gy) and a higher intermediate dose spillage (D2cm). No statistically significant differences were found when benchmarking HA2‐DL10 and HA3‐DL10 with the C‐arm linacs. All plans passed the patient‐specific QA tolerance limit.Conclusions: Automated planning of prostate SBRT with focal boosting on the fast‐rotating O‐ring linac is feasible and achieves similar plan quality as those obtained on clinical C‐arm linacs using manual planning.

Fast rotating closed-bore gantry linacs are ideally suited for breath-hold treatments due to reduced imaging and delivery times. We evaluated the reproducibility and stability of spirometer-guided breath-hold breast treatments, using intra-bore surface monitoring and portal imaging on Halcyon (Varian Medical Systems). Seven left-sided breast cancer patients were treated in breath-hold using the SDX spirometer (Dyn'R) with an integrated boost volumetric arc protocol on Halcyon. A dual depth-camera surface scanning system monitored the left breast. The interfraction, intrafraction and intrabreath-hold motion was determined in the anterior-posterior (AP) and superior-inferior (SI) direction. Portal images (PI), acquired at a tangential gantry angle were manually registered to the planning-CT to determine inter- and intrafraction breath-hold errors for the SI and tangential-anterior-posterior ("AP") axis. Correlations between PI and surface imaging deviations were investigated. To evaluate workflow efficiency, the total time and the number of breath-holds were recorded. Systematic and random variability of breath-hold amplitude was below 0.7 mm for the AP and below 1.2 mm for the SI component as detected by surface monitoring (N = 130). Systematic and random errors retrieved from portal images (N = 140) were below 1.2 mm for the "AP" and 2.1 mm for SI axis. A limited correlation was found between PI and surface monitoring deviations for both the SI and "AP" axes (R2 = 0.27/0.38, p < 0.01). 75% of fractions were completed using four breath-holds and 82% within 10 min. Surface imaging indicated spirometer-guided breath-hold VMAT breast radiotherapy can be accurately and quickly performed on a closed-bore gantry linac. Intra-bore surface scanning proved a valuable technique for monitoring breathing motion in closed-bore systems.