01-06-2020 | Prostate Cancer | Correction
Correction to: The natural course of pT2 prostate cancer with positive surgical margin: predicting biochemical recurrence
Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 6/2020
Login to get accessExcerpt
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
|
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
|