This study investigates daily dose to prone-positioned patients undergoing tangential WBRT on an O-ring LINAC with 6X-FFF energy. For prone breast patients, most practices rely on skin marks or daily planar image matching. This system provides low dose (<1mGy CTDIvol) daily CBCT, which was used to verify daily robustness of target coverage and hotspot dose metrics for prone-position WBRT. Eight patients treated with 16-fraction prone breast WBRT planned with ECOMP were retroactively studied. During treatment, patients were positioned under CBCT guidance by matching to the chest wall. Planning CTs were deformed to daily CBCT to generate daily synthetic CTs, on which daily dose distributions were calculated. A total of 8 patients x 16 fractions = 128 synthetic CTs were generated. Consensus ASTRO definition was used to contour Breast PTV Eval for each daily deformed CT. Target coverage (V90%) and hotspot (V105%) to Breast PTV Eval contour was monitored each day. Various predictors (patient weight, breast separation, breast deformation / dice similarity coefficient DSC, etc.) were fit into a mixed effect linear regression model predicting V90% and V105% deviation from planned values (ΔV90%, ΔV105%). Statistical significance is indicated with asterisks (* for p<0.05; ** for p<0.001). For all synthetic CTs studied, V90% (as % of Breast PTV Eval volume) was moderately smaller than planned (median ΔV90% = -0.1%*), while V105% was much larger (median ΔV105% = +10.1%** or +92.4cc**). Among all fractions studied, only 40% met PTV Breast Eval V105%<15% criteria and 59% met V90%>95%. V90% and V105% did not correlate with time. Breast PTV Eval volume decreased with time (-2.21cc per fx*), possibly indicating general weight loss or seroma resolution. Patient’s weight loss correlated with significantly increased V105% (+4.6% / -1% weight., R = 0.4**) and moderately decreased V90% (-0.071% / -1% wt., R = 0.2**). However, comprehensive models indicate three factors influence ΔV90% and ΔV105% the most (with R = 0.86**, 0.95** respectively): (1) Breast separation decrease (-0.09%* and +10%** per -1cm), (2) PTV Eval volume decrease (-0.4%** and +9%** per -100cc), and for ΔV105% only, (3) more breast deformation (+10%** per -1% ΔDSC). For patients undergoing tangential prone breast WBRT with ECOMP-planned parallel opposed beams, daily CBCT revealed key dosimetric parameters vary significantly, especially for V105% associated with negative cosmesis. Patient weight loss substantially increased hotspots and slightly decreased coverage over treatment course. Breast separation and shape changes could be used to predict dosimetric variations. Preliminary findings suggest some patients could benefit from an adaptive plan based on daily CBCT.