Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Urology 6/2020

01-06-2020 | Prostate Cancer | Correction

Correction to: The natural course of pT2 prostate cancer with positive surgical margin: predicting biochemical recurrence

Authors: A. Karl, A. Buchner, C. Tympner, T. Kirchner, U. Ganswindt, C. Belka, R. Ganzer, M. Burger, F. Eder, F. Hofstädter, D. Schilling, K. Sievert, A. Stenzl, M. Scharpf, F. Fend, F.vom Dorp, H. Rübben, K. Schmid, D. Porres‑Knoblauch, A. Heidenreich, B. Hangarter, R. Knuchel‑Clarke, M. Rogenhofer, B. Wullich, A. Hartmann, E. Comploj, A. Pycha, E. Hanspeter, D. Pehrke, G. Sauter, M. Graefen, C. Stief, A. Haese

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 6/2020

Login to get access

Excerpt

The authors recognized an error regarding the content of Tables 2 and 3 in the original publication of the above article. The correct Tables 2 and 3 are given below.
Table 2
Univariate Cox regression analysis of potential prognostic parameters for biochemical recurrence
Variable
Hazard ratio
95% Confidence interval
p value
Prostate volume*
0.99
0.98–1.00
0.016
Tumor percentage*
1.00
0.98–1.01
0.817
Maximum positive margin*
1.02
0.98–1.06
0.420
Age*
1.00
0.98–1.02
0.892
PSA preoperative *
1.00
1.00–1.01
0.450
Nerve sparing surgery
1.11
0.69–1.81
0.664
Pelvic lymph node dissection performed
1.50
1.16–1.94
0.002
Pathological Gleason Score
   
 < 0.001
 Gleason 3 + 4 = 7a vs. Gleason 6
1.84
1.38–2.47
 < 0.001
 Gleason 4 + 3 = 7b vs. Gleason 6
3.80
2.43–5.94
 < 0.001
 Gleason 8–10 vs. Gleason 6
7.18
3.94–13.07
 < 0.001
Perineural infiltration
1.83
1.11–3.00
0.017
L-Status
2.03
1.03–4.02
0.041
V-Status
4.73
1.45–15.42
0.010
Gleason Grade at positive margin (Gl. 4/5 vs. Gl. ≤ 3)
1.94
1.26–2.99
0.003
Bilateral vs. unilateral tumor
1.34
1.00–1.81
0.051
Parameters marked with asterisk (*) were used as continuous variables; Gleason score was analyzed in four categories (6/7a/7b/8–10) using score 6 as reference
Table 3
Multivariate Cox regression analysis of potential prognostic parameters for biochemical recurrence
Variable
Hazard ratio
95% Confidence interval
p value
Pelvic lymph node dissection performed
1.11
0.70–1.76
0.652
Pathological Gleason Score
   
 < 0.001
 Gleason 3 + 4 = 7a vs. Gleason 6
1.50
0.92–2.46
0.106
 Gleason 4 + 3 = 7b vs. Gleason 6
2.72
1.42–5.23
0.003
 Gleason 8–10 vs. Gleason 6
4.77
2.15–10.58
 < 0.001
Gleason Grade at positive margin (Gl. 4/5 vs. Gl. ≤ 3)
1.23
0.75–2.01
0.415
Parameters with p < 0.01 in univariate analysis were included. Parameters marked with asterisk (*) were used as continuous variables; Gleason score was analyzed in four categories (6/7a/7b/8–10) using score 6 as reference
Metadata
Title
Correction to: The natural course of pT2 prostate cancer with positive surgical margin: predicting biochemical recurrence
Authors
A. Karl
A. Buchner
C. Tympner
T. Kirchner
U. Ganswindt
C. Belka
R. Ganzer
M. Burger
F. Eder
F. Hofstädter
D. Schilling
K. Sievert
A. Stenzl
M. Scharpf
F. Fend
F.vom Dorp
H. Rübben
K. Schmid
D. Porres‑Knoblauch
A. Heidenreich
B. Hangarter
R. Knuchel‑Clarke
M. Rogenhofer
B. Wullich
A. Hartmann
E. Comploj
A. Pycha
E. Hanspeter
D. Pehrke
G. Sauter
M. Graefen
C. Stief
A. Haese
Publication date
01-06-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 6/2020
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03136-9

Other articles of this Issue 6/2020

World Journal of Urology 6/2020 Go to the issue