Although adding a tuning structure (in AP 5) has improved dose homogeneity some, the AP results in this subgroup are still inferior to the HDPs. The maximum dose (single voxel) was lower with high statistical significance (p=0.008) for the HDPs. For those, only one case had a hot spot above 107% of prescription (0 score), and six cases recorded ≤105 of prescription (100% score). At the same time, six of the APs failed to maintain the maximum dose below 107% of the prescription, and only one had the hot spot under 105%. Also statistically significant (p=0.03) was the difference for the PTV volume at or above 73.5 Gy (105% of prescription). In all HDPs, the volume did not exceed 1 cm3 (100% score). Four of the APs achieved the same result, while one had the ≥105% dose volume in the PTV above 15 cm3 (zero score), with the remaining five falling in between 1 and 15 cm3. While not a part of the tabulated composite score, the total volume irradiated to at least 73.5 Gy exhibited highly statistically significant difference between the median values of the HDPs and APs (p=0.004). In the HDPs, it was kept consistently low (0−3.9 cm3), while for the APs it varied widely from 1 to 501.8 cm3. Once again, this does not contradict the RTOG 1016 acceptability analysis since the hot spot here is defined more stringently: at a lower level (75 vs. 82 Gy) and for a single voxel, as compared to 1 cm3 in the protocol. For the HDPs, the hot spot was always located either in the GTV (3 cases) or PTV_70. For the APs, the hot spot was located in PTV_70 eight times, and twice elsewhere. Interestingly, despite the difference in dose homogeneity, the conformity number between PTV_70 and the 70 Gy dose volume was essentially the same between the HDPs and APs.