Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Correction to: Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine https://doi.org/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.
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
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Andreassen, M.M.S., Goa, P.E., Sjøbakk, T.E. et al. 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. Magn Reson Mater Phy 33, 329–330 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-019-00789-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-019-00789-5