How much rotational error is clinically acceptable for single‐isocenter/two‐lesion lung SBRT treatment on halcyon ring delivery system (RDS)?

PURPOSE: SBRT treatment of two separate lung lesions via single‐isocenter/multi‐target (SIMT) plan on Halcyon RDS could improve patient comfort, compliance, patient throughput, and clinic efficiency. However, aligning two separate lung lesions synchronously via a single pre‐treatment CBCT scan on Halcyon can be difficult due to rotational patient setup errors. Thus, to quantify the dosimetric impact, we simulated loss of target(s) coverage due to small, yet clinically observable rotational patient setup errors on Halcyon for SIMT treatments. METHODS: Seventeen previously treated 4D‐CT based SIMT lung SBRT patients with two separate lesions (total 34 lesions, 50 Gy in five fractions to each lesion) on TrueBeam (6MV‐FFF) were re‐planned on Halcyon (6MV‐FFF) using a similar arc geometry (except couch rotation), dose engine (AcurosXB algorithm), and treatment planning objectives. Rotational patient setup errors of [± 0.5⁰ to ± 3.0⁰] on Halcyon were simulated via Velocity registration software in all three rotation axes and recalculated dose distributions in Eclipse treatment planning system. Dosimetric impact of rotational errors was evaluated for target coverage and organs at risk (OAR). RESULTS: Average PTV volume and distance to isocenter were 23.7 cc and 6.1 cm. Average change in Paddick's conformity indexes were less than −5%, −10%, and −15% for 1°, 2°, and 3°, respectively for yaw, roll, and pitch rotation directions. Maximum drop off of PTV(D100%) coverage for 2° rotation was −2.0% (yaw), −2.2% (roll), and −2.5% (pitch). With ±1° rotational error, no PTV(D100%) loss was found. Due to anatomical complexity: irregular and highly variable tumor sizes and locations, highly heterogenous dose distribution, and steep dose gradient, no trend for loss of target(s) coverage as a function of distance to isocenter and PTV size was found. Change in maximum dose to OAR were acceptable per NRG‐BR001 within ±1.0° rotation, but were up to 5 Gy higher to heart with 2° in the pitch rotation axis. CONCLUSION: Our clinically realistic simulation results show that rotational patient setup errors up to 1.0° in any rotation axis could be acceptable for selected two separate lung lesions SBRT patients on Halcyon. Multivariable data analysis in large cohort is ongoing to fully characterize Halcyon RDS for synchronous SIMT lung SBRT.