Skip to main content

Advertisement

Erratum to: Effective dose to adult patients from 338 radiopharmaceuticals estimated using ICRP biokinetic data, ICRP/ICRU computational reference phantoms and ICRP 2007 tissue weighting factors

Article metrics

  • 1047 Accesses

  • 8 Citations

The original article was published in EJNMMI Physics 2014 1:9

Correction of the article

In the results section of the abstract the two sentences

  1. 1.

    For 79 % of the radiopharmaceuticals, the new calculations gave a lower effective dose per unit administered activity than earlier estimated.” Should be “For 63 % of the radiopharmaceuticals, the new calculations gave a lower effective dose per unit administered activity than earlier estimated.”

  2. 2.

    “As a mean for all radiopharmaceuticals, the effective dose was 25 % lower.” Should be“As a mean for all radiopharmaceuticals, the effective dose was 11 % lower.”

In the results section in the main article four sentences should be changed

  1. 1.

    “The calculated values are lower than earlier presented values for 79 % of the radiopharmaceuticals.” Should be “The calculated values are lower than earlier presented values for 63 % of the radiopharmaceuticals.”

  2. 2.

    “As a mean for all 338 radiopharmaceuticals, the values are 25 % lower.” Should be “As a mean for all 338 radiopharmaceuticals, the values are 11 % lower.”

  3. 3.

    “The effective doses are larger for females than for males in 62 % of all 338 radiopharmaceuticals.” Should be “The effective doses are larger for females than for males in 99 % of all 338 radiopharmaceuticals.”

  4. 4.

    “Only for 125I Iodine Hippuran with unilateral renal blockage and an abnormal kidney function there is a difference of more than 100 % between the new and the old E/A0 values.” Should be “Only for 99mTc Apcitide and 99mTc labelled colloids, small colloids and normal liver condition there is a difference of more than 100 % between the new and the old E/A0 values.”

In the Discussion section in the main article eight sentences should be changed

  1. 1.

    “For radiopharmaceuticals with a significant uptake in adipose tissue as for 14C- and 3H-labelled neutral fat and free fatty acids or in the male gonads, the effective dose will be higher for males than for females.” Should be “For radiopharmaceuticals with a significant uptake in adipose tissue as for 14C- and 3H-labelled neutral fat and free fatty acids, the effective dose will be higher for males than for females.”

  2. 2.

    “For 18 F-labelled substances, E/A0 varies between 0.013 and 0.019 mSv/MBq (less than a factor of 1.5).” Should be “For 18 F-labelled substances, E/A0 varies between 0.013 and 0.021 mSv/MBq (a factor of 1.6).”

  3. 3.

    “For 11C-substances, E/A0 varies between 0.0025 and 0.0055 mSv/MBq (around a factor of 2.2).” Should be “For 11C-substances, E/A0 varies between 0.0011 and 0.0087 mSv/MBq (around a factor of 8.0). “

  4. 4.

    “Also for 99mTc-labelled substances, the range of E/A0 values is limited to 0.0017 to 0.016 mSv/MBq (a factor of 9.6).” Should be “Also for 99mTc-labelled substances, the range of E/A0 values is limited to 0.0022 to 0.020 mSv/MBq (a factor of 8.8).”

  5. 5.

    “For all the 18 F substances, there is a reduction in effective dose estimation by 29 % in average.” Should be “For all the 18 F substances, there is a reduction in effective dose estimation by 26 % in average.”

  6. 6.

    “For 11C-substances, two radiopharmaceuticals show a higher effective dose and 11 have a lower effective dose than previously published values.” Should be “For 11C-substances, nine radiopharmaceuticals show a higher effective dose and four have a lower effective dose than previously published values.”

  7. 7.

    “In 50 of the 62 99mTc-substances, the effective dose estimations give lower values than previous estimations.” Should be “In 38 of the 62 99mTc-substances, the effective dose estimations give lower values than previous estimations.”

  8. 8.

    “Using the new estimations, the collective effective dose is estimated at 292 manSv, i.e. 13 % lower value than earlier estimated.” Should be “Using the new estimations, the collective effective dose is estimated at 295 manSv, i.e. 12 % lower value than earlier estimated.”

In the Conclusions there are two sentences that should be changed

  1. 1.

    “For 268 radiopharmaceuticals out of 338, the new calculations show lower effective dose values than previous estimates.” Should be “For 212 radiopharmaceuticals out of 338, the new calculations show lower effective dose values than previous estimates.”

  2. 2.

    “For 68 radiopharmaceuticals, the new calculations results in an increased value of the estimated effective dose.” Should be “For 120 radiopharmaceuticals, the new calculations results in an increased value of the estimated effective dose.”

Figure 1 should be changed to (only the figure not the text)

Fig. 1
figure1

A histogram of the relative difference between different dose values. The relative difference between the old published effective dose per unit administered activity and the effective dose values calculated with the new phantom (ICRP 110) and with (1) the new (ICRP 103) and (2) the previous (ICRP 60) tissue weighting factors. The arrow indicates identical results between old and new estimations

Almost all numbers have been changed in Table 1 and a new corrected Table 1 is presented below (table text to Table 1 does not need to be changed)

Table 1 Effective dose from the 55 radiopharmaceuticals in ICRP publication 106, determined using three different methods

.

A new Supplemental file is given in a separate file named “Additional file 1: Table S1”.

Author information

Correspondence to Martin Andersson.

Additional file 1

Additional file 1: Table S1.

Effective dose from all the radiopharmaceuticals published by the ICRP, determined using three different methods. (E/A0) 1 is the previously published effective dose per unit administered activity (E/A0) by ICRP, (E/A0)2 is (E/A0) dose calculated with the new phantoms and old tissue weighting factors while (E/A0) 3 is with the new phantoms and new weighting factors. (E/A0)2-(E/A0) 1))/ (E/A0)1 and ((E/A0) 3-(E/A0)1)/ (E/A0)1 is the difference in % of the new values compared to the old. (E/A0)3 male and (E/A0)3 are the effective dose estimations generated from the equivalent dose of each gender separately using the new phantoms and new weighting factors. (DOCX 65 kb)

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.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark