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
Feihang Wang1,2,3†
Shaonan Fan4†
Qin Shi1,2,3†Danyang Zhao1,2,3Huiyi Sun5
Yav Sothea1,2,3Mengfei Wu6Huadan Song7Yi Chen1,2,3Jiemin Cheng1,2,3
Zhaochong Zeng4
Zhiping Yan1,2,3Jian He4*
Lingxiao Liu1,2,3*- 1Department of Interventional Radiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- 2Shanghai Institute of Medical Imaging, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- 3National Clinical Research Center for Interventional Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- 4Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- 5Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- 6Department of Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
- 7Department of Radiology, Xinhua Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
by Wang F, Fan S, Shi Q, Zhao D, Sun H, Sothea Y, Wu M, Song H, Chen Y, Cheng J, Zeng Z, Yan Z, He J and Liu L (2022) 12:947284. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.947284
In the published article, there was an error in affiliation of Zhaochong Zeng and Jian He. Instead of” Zhaochong Zeng2”and “Jian He2*”, the Shanghai Institute of Medical Imaging, Fudan University, Shanghai, China, it should be “Zhaochong Zeng4” and “Jian He4*”, the Department of Radiation Oncology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
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: pulmonary metastases, hepatocellular carcinoma, thermal ablation, helical tomotherapy, comparison
Citation: Wang F, Fan S, Shi Q, Zhao D, Sun H, Sothea Y, Wu M, Song H, Chen Y, Cheng J, Zeng Z, Yan Z, He J and Liu L (2022) Corrigendum: Comparison of clinical outcomes between cone beam CT-guided thermal ablation and helical tomotherapy in pulmonary metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma. Front. Oncol. 12:1038584. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1038584
Received: 07 September 2022; Accepted: 27 September 2022;
Published: 06 October 2022.
Approved by:
Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, SwitzerlandCopyright © 2022 Wang, Fan, Shi, Zhao, Sun, Sothea, Wu, Song, Chen, Cheng, Zeng, Yan, He 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: Jian He, aGVqaWFuNjJAMTYzLmNvbQ==; Lingxiao Liu, bGl1bGluZ3hpYW8yMDIyQDE2My5jb20=
†These authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship