Fen Xi1,2,3
Jianhua Liu
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
- 1The First Affiliated Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
- 2Department of Ultrasound Medical, Guangzhou First People’s Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China
- 3The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
A Corrigendum on
Microbubbles Ultrasonic Cavitation Regulates Tumor Interstitial Fluid Pressure and Enhances Sonodynamic Therapy
Xi F, Feng Y, Chen Q, Chen L and Liu J (2022) Front. Oncol. 12:852454. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.852454
In the original article, there was an error. The dosage of the sonosensitizers HMME is incorrect. 0.5mg/kg needs to be corrected to 5.0mg/kg.
A correction has been made to Materials and Methods, “Microbubbles ultrasonic cavitation therapy”.
“Twenty tumor-bearing rabbits without defects related to the above contrast medium were divided into four groups (five rabbits in each group): HMME + MBUS1, HMME + US1, HMME, and blank control. Each group was treated as follows: in the HMME + MBUS1 group, each rabbit was intravenously injected with 5.0 mg/kg HMME at the ear margin 1 h later, ultrasonic emission frequency of 2.5 MPa, pulse repetition frequency of 10 Hz, a duty cycle of 0.2%, pulse emission/gap time of 9 s/3 s (The choice of this parameter is based on prior research that we are currently publishing), and irradiation time of 5 min(Shenzhen Wilde Medical Electronics Co., Ltd., models dct-700 and kht-017; effective diameter 20 mm). The probe irradiated the tumor and the SonoVue microbubbles diluted (5 mL with sterile normal saline) were slowly injected (0.5 mL/kg); in the HMME + US1 group, after each tumor-bearing rabbit was injected with the same HMME dose for 1 h, the ultrasound treatment probe was irradiated and the same volume of normal saline was slowly injected; in the HMME group, after each tumor-bearing rabbit was injected with the same HMME dose for 1 h, the ultrasound was sham irradiated for 5 min; in the blank control group, the tumor-bearing rabbits were injected with the same volume of normal saline for 1 h, then the ultrasound was sham irradiated for 5 min. The tumor IFP was measured by the WIN method before and after ultrasonic treatments”.
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher’s Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Keywords: ultrasound, Microbubbles, cavitation, tumor interstitial fluid pressure, SDT
Citation: Xi F, Feng Y, Chen Q, Chen L and Liu J (2022) Corrigendum: Microbubbles Ultrasonic Cavitation Regulates Tumor Interstitial Fluid Pressure and Enhances Sonodynamic Therapy. Front. Oncol. 12:942496. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.942496
Received: 12 May 2022; Accepted: 27 May 2022;
Published: 17 June 2022.
Edited and reviewed by:
Kun Zhang, Tongji University, ChinaCopyright © 2022 Xi, Feng, Chen, Chen and Liu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Jianhua Liu, ZXlsaXVqaWFuaHVhQHNjdXQuZWR1LmNu