Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Incorporation of excess gadolinium into human bone from medical contrast agents

Darrah, Thomas H., Prutsman-Pfeiffer, Jennifer J., Poreda, Robert J., Ellen Campbell, M., Hauschka, Peter V., Hannigan, Robyn E.·2009·Metallomics

Abstract

We find anomalously high gadolinium (Gd) concentrations in the femoral head bones of patients exposed to chelated Gd, commonly used as a contrast agent for medical imaging. Gd is introduced in chelated form to protect patients from exposure to toxic free Gd(3+), a calcium antagonist which disrupts cellular processes. Recent studies suggest Gd chelates break down in vivo, and Gd accumulation in tissue is linked to medical conditions such as nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF), acute kidney failure, and in some cases death. We measure Gd and other rare earth element (REE) concentrations in 35 femoral heads by solution based ICP-MS. Gd concentrations in patients with documented exposure to Gd-based contrast agents (n = 13: Gd DTPA-BMA (Omniscan) n = 6; Gd HP-DO3A (Prohance) n = 5; unknown type n = 4) are significantly higher (p < 0.001) than the control group (n = 17). We use our control group to establish the 'natural' background level of Gd in human bone (cortical 95% CI: 0.023, 0.041 nmol/g; trabecular 95% CI: 0.054, 0.107 nmol/g). A control group outlier reveals the occurrence of individuals with high concentrations of all REEs, including Gd. Because of this, we calculate Gd anomalies from the concentrations of adjacent REEs and normalize to the control group mean to isolate Gd input from contrast agents. Normalized Gd anomalies, (Gd/Gd*)(N), for exposed patients range up to >800 times the 'natural' level (95% CI: 124, 460). Our data confirm that Gd, introduced in chelated form, incorporates into bone and is retained for more than 8 years. No difference was observed in bone Gd concentrations and anomalies between patients dosed with Gd DTPA-BMA (Omniscan; n = 6) and Gd HP-DO3A (Prohance; n = 5). Osteoporotic fracture patients exposed to Gd have significantly lower Gd concentrations than osteoarthritis patients (p < 0.001). This indicates different mechanisms of metal incorporation and/or retention in osteoporotic bone tissues, and may signal an increased risk of endogenous Gd release for patients with increased rates of bone resorption (e.g. osteoporosis patients and menopausal, pregnant, and lactating women) who are exposed to Gd-based contrast agents.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1039/b905145g

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 39 references

Cited by

See all 299

Metadata

Authors
Darrah, T. H., Prutsman-Pfeiffer, J. J., Poreda, R. J., Ellen Campbell, M., Hauschka, P. V., & Hannigan, R. E.
Venue
Metallomics
Published
2009
Volume
1
Issue
6
Pages
479
ISSN
  • 1756-5901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1756-591X
OpenAlex
W2129768655
Cited by
299
References
39
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Incorporation of excess gadolinium into human bone from medical contrast agents. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/b905145g
The paper
Darrah, T. H., Prutsman-Pfeiffer, J. J., Poreda, R. J., Ellen Campbell, M., Hauschka, P. V., & Hannigan, R. E. (2009). Incorporation of excess gadolinium into human bone from medical contrast agents. Metallomics. https://doi.org/10.1039/b905145g

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.