1. Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology
The normal tissue sparing potential of an adaptive plan selection strategy for re- irradiation of recurrent rectal cancer 
Camilla S. Byskov, Lars Nyvang, Marianne G. Guren, Karen-Lise G. Spindler, Ludvig P. Muren 
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 
Volume 3, Pages (July 2017)
DOI: /j.phro
Copyright © 2017 The Authors Terms and Conditions

2. Fig. 1
Planning CT scans with clinical target volumes (CTVs) for all eight patients.
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 2017 3, 43-48DOI: ( /j.phro )
Copyright © 2017 The Authors Terms and Conditions

3. Fig. 2
PTVs and dose distributions for a) plan S (CTV+5mm), b) plan M (CTV+10mm) and c) the standard plan L (CTV+15mm, trimmed) for one patient. Standard CTV (pink), PTV (blue) and library PTVs (green) are depicted in d). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 2017 3, 43-48DOI: ( /j.phro )
Copyright © 2017 The Authors Terms and Conditions

4. Fig. 3
Bone DVHs for each patient. Solid lines are standard treatment DVHs (Std), dashed lines are the resulting DVHs upon plan selection (PS).
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 2017 3, 43-48DOI: ( /j.phro )
Copyright © 2017 The Authors Terms and Conditions

5. Fig. 4
Bladder DVHs for one patient showing the 26 individual DVHs from the standard treatment (blue) and the plan selection strategy (light blue). pCT DVHs are shown in red and the average/summed DVHs in black (solid=standard, dashed=plan selection). Dose to the bladder is reduced for all of the DVHs calculated from plan S (light blue) compared to the DVHs from the delivered treatment plan (blue). In both cases, since the bladder seen on the pCT is smaller than on the rest of the bladders from the CBCTs, the pCT DVHs (red) are smaller. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 2017 3, 43-48DOI: ( /j.phro )
Copyright © 2017 The Authors Terms and Conditions