Erratum: PET of poly (ADP-Ribose) polymerase activity in cancer: Preclinical assessment and first in-human studies (Radiology (2017) 282:2 (453-463) DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016161929)

This erratum corrects an error in the original interpretation of the images from the two pancreatic cancer cases reported in the manuscript. 18F-FluorThanaTrace (18F-FTT) images from patients with pancreatic cancer obtained subsequent to the publication of this manuscript prompted a re-review of the images published in this text. It was discovered that the histories for the two reported cases were switched. Also, on re-review of the images, the pancreatic tumor for the case shown in figure 5 of the manuscript was found to be located more superiorly and to have more limited inferior extension than shown in the original publication. The following erratum corrects the reported information and data interpretation for these two cases. An additional correction to the time of image acquisition for the one liver cancer case shown in figure 6 is also reported. This information does not affect the validity of the remainder of the data as originally reported in the manuscript, including the animal data supporting specificity of tracer binding and the estimated human radiation dosimetry. (Figure Presented). Manuscript text corrections:Page 453, Abstract, last line in Results should read “was seen in one subject with liver cancer.” Page 459, last sentence of the third column should read “Of the three remaining subjects with measurable disease, one had visible tumor 18F-FTT uptake above the background activity.” Page 460, first complete sentence of the first column should read “Two subjects with recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma did not demonstrate tumor 18F-FTT uptake above the background activity.” Page 461, first complete sentence of the first column should read “…with increased tumor uptake observed in one subject.” Page 461, second sentence of the third column should read “The increased 18F-FTT uptake in one subject with biphenotypic hepatocellular carcinoma/cholangiocarcinoma suggests that this cancer type may be differentiated from background activity.” Page 461, fifth sentence of the third column should read “Although the high normal pancreas activity may limit detection of the primary tumor, pancreatic ancer metastases may behave differently. Given that a subset of pancreatic cancer patients respond to PARP inhibitors (30), suggesting the presence of PARP expression, this warrants further investigation as a tool for identifying such patients.” Page 461, mid-third column should read “Finally, one subject had no visible 18F-FTT uptake at 18 days after radiation therapy, a time point at which 18F fluorodeoxyglucose would almost certainly be increased; however, it is also possible that the original tumor also did not have 18F-FTT uptake prior to treatment.” Figure and figure legend corrections: Page 459, figure and legend for figure 5 should be replaced with the following as the location of the tumor was determined to be located more superiorly and had more limited inferior extension than originally shown: “A, 18F-FTT PET (top), unenhanced CT (middle), and fused transaxial (bottom) images and, B, contrast-enhanced CT images in 52-year-old man with locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (subject 2, Table 2) Images were obtained 30 minutes after tracer injection. Blue arrow indicates location of recurrent pancreatic cancer. Red arrow indicates left adrenal gland. Gray-scale and color PET images were set to same scale as shown in the original figure." Page 460, figure 6, seventh sentence should read “PET/CT images were obtained at 120 minutes after tracer injection.