Doorgaan naar hoofdnavigatie Doorgaan naar zoeken Ga verder naar hoofdinhoud

Correction: Kalisvaart et al. Relative Wash-In Rate in Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a New Prognostic Biomarker for Event-Free Survival in 82 Patients with Osteosarcoma: A Multicenter Study. Cancers 2024, 16, 1954. Relative Wash-In Rate in Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a New Prognostic Biomarker for Event-Free Survival in 82 Patients with Osteosarcoma: A Multicenter Study (Cancers, (2024), 16, 11, (1954), 10.3390/cancers16111954)

  • Gijsbert M. Kalisvaart
  • , Richard E. Evenhuis
  • , Willem Grootjans
  • , Thomas Van Den Berghe
  • , Martijn Callens
  • , Judith V.M.G. Bovée
  • , David Creytens
  • , Hans Gelderblom
  • , Frank M. Speetjens
  • , Lore Lapeire
  • , Gwen Sys
  • , Marta Fiocco
  • , Koenraad L. Verstraete
  • , Michiel A.J.van de Sande
  • , Johan L. Bloem

Onderzoeksoutput: Bijdrage aan tijdschriftOpmerking/debat

1 Citaat (Scopus)

Samenvatting

In the original publication [1], there was a mistake in the legend of Figure 2 as published. In the original version the legend wrongly states the red line accounts for patients with ‘rWIR ≥ 2.3 (good response),’ whereas it actually accounts for patients with poor response. The corrected Figure 2 appears below. In the original publication, there was a mistake in the legend of Figure 3 as published. In the original version the legend wrongly states the red line accounts for patients with ‘rWIR ≥ 2.3 (good response),’ whereas it actually accounts for patients with poor response. The corrected Figure 3 appears below. In the original publication, there was a mistake in Table 2 as published. The fourth column of the original table wrongly defines good and poor radiological responders. rWIR < 2.3 should define poor response and rWIR ≥ 2.3 should define good response. The corrected Table 2 appears below. In the original publication, there was a mistake in Table 3 as published. The fourth column of the original table wrongly defines good and poor radiological responders. rWIR < 2.3 should define poor response and rWIR ≥ 2.3 should define good response. The corrected Table 3 appears below. The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.

Originele taal-2Engels
Artikelnummer2603
TijdschriftCancers
Volume17
Nummer van het tijdschrift16
DOI's
StatusGepubliceerd - 8 aug. 2025

Vingerafdruk

Duik in de onderzoeksthema's van 'Correction: Kalisvaart et al. Relative Wash-In Rate in Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a New Prognostic Biomarker for Event-Free Survival in 82 Patients with Osteosarcoma: A Multicenter Study. Cancers 2024, 16, 1954. Relative Wash-In Rate in Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a New Prognostic Biomarker for Event-Free Survival in 82 Patients with Osteosarcoma: A Multicenter Study (Cancers, (2024), 16, 11, (1954), 10.3390/cancers16111954)'. Samen vormen ze een unieke vingerafdruk.

Citeer dit