Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2019 Oct 29;33(2):329–330. doi: 10.1007/s10334-019-00789-5

Correction to: Semi-automatic segmentation from intrinsically-registered 18F-FDG–PET/MRI for treatment response assessment in a breast cancer cohort: comparison to manual DCE–MRI

Maren Marie Sjaastad Andreassen 1, Pål Erik Goa 2,3, Torill Eidhammer Sjøbakk 1, Roja Hedayati 4,5, Hans Petter Eikesdal 6,7, Callie Deng 1, Agnes Østlie 3, Steinar Lundgren 4,5, Tone Frost Bathen 1,3, Neil Peter Jerome 1,3,✉
PMCID: PMC7109195  PMID: 31664580

Correction to: Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine 10.1007/s10334-019-00778-8

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake in Fig. 6.

The corrected Fig. 6 is placed in the following page.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Open in a new tab

Relationship between the resulting metrics from manual DCE and GMM–PET for a ADC mean for untreated lesions (r = 0.866, p < 0.001) and b treated lesions (r = 0.895, p < 0.001) and m tumor area from c untreated (r = 0.870, p < 0.0001) and d treated (r = 0.928, p < 0.001) lesions. Red identity lines included show that area from GMM–PET is slightly smaller than from manual DCE

Footnotes

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Articles from Magma (New York, N.y.) are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES