Published in:
01-04-2018 | Correction
Correction to: High expression of HO-1 predicts poor prognosis of ovarian cancer patients and promotes proliferation and aggressiveness of ovarian cancer cells
Published in: Clinical and Translational Oncology | Issue 4/2018
Login to get accessExcerpt
In the original version of the article, Table 2 was incorrect. The corrected Table 2 is shown here. Therefore, in Results (page 3 of original version, right column, line 13), the OR of non-optimal debulking should read OR = 3.036 with 95% CI 1.452–6.348.
Table 2
Relationships between the expression of HO-1 protein and clinicopathological characteristics of patients with ovarian cancer
|
Characteristics
|
No.
|
HO-1 expression
|
P value
|
OR (95% CI)
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cases
|
Low
|
High
|
|||
|
Pathologic type
|
0.0235
|
||||
|
Serous
|
117
|
36
|
81 (69.2%)
|
0.6912
|
|
|
Low-grade serous
|
58
|
19
|
39 (67.2%)
|
||
|
High-grade serous
|
59
|
17
|
42(71.2%)
|
||
|
Mucinous
|
16
|
11
|
5 (31.3%)
|
||
|
Endometrioid
|
25
|
8
|
17 (68.0%)
|
||
|
Clear cell carcinoma
|
21
|
11
|
10 (47.6%)
|
||
|
Others
|
22
|
8
|
14 (63.6%)
|
||
|
Age
|
0.4796
|
||||
|
≤ 50
|
113
|
44
|
69 (61.1%)
|
||
|
> 50
|
88
|
30
|
58 (65.9%)
|
||
|
Stage
|
0.0017
|
3.656 (1.602–8.344)
|
|||
|
I–II
|
154
|
66
|
88 (57.1%)
|
||
|
III–IV
|
47
|
8
|
39 (83.0%)
|
||
|
Differentiation
|
0.5572
|
||||
|
G1/G2
|
112
|
39
|
73 (65.2%)
|
||
|
G3
|
89
|
35
|
54 (60.7%)
|
||
|
Lymph node metastasisa
|
0.0001
|
7.779 (2.280–26.540)
|
|||
|
No
|
156
|
67
|
89 (57.1%)
|
||
|
Yes
|
34
|
3
|
31 (91.2%)
|
||
|
Optimal debulking
|
0.0029
|
3.036 (1.452–6.348)
|
|||
|
Optimal
|
146
|
63
|
83 (56.8%)
|
||
|
Non-optimal
|
55
|
11
|
44 (80.0%)
|
||