In the published article, there was an error for Figure 1 as published. The correct Figure 1A corresponds to the image of Figure 4B as published, and the correct Figure 1B corresponds to the image of Figure 4A as published.
FIGURE 1
The significant association between RS and continous variables of characteristics (A) in pN0 cases: four characteristics (p-values of Spearman correlation) (B) in pN1 cases: three characteristics (p-values of Pearson correlation).
In the published article, there was an error for Figure 4 as published. The correct Figure 4A corresponds to the image of Figure 1B as published, and the correct Figure 4B corresponds to the image of Figure 1A as published.
FIGURE 4
Correlation between RS and NPI risk groups (A) in pN0 cases: Spearman ρ = 0.286 (p = 0.033); dashed lines: thresholds for NPI between the excellent (≤2.4) and the good (>2.4 and ≤3.4); the good (>2.4 and ≤3.4) and the moderate (>3.4) groups; correlation between NPI score and RS for patients with the excellent group [Spearman ρ = −0.151 (p = 0.435)]; correlation between NPI score and RS with the good group [Spearman ρ = 0.159 (p = 0.541)]; correlation between NPI score and RS with the moderate groups [Spearman ρ = 0.719 (p = 0.019)] (B) in pN1 cases: Pearson correlation r = 0.322 (p = 0.049); dashed lines: thresholds for NPI between the good (>2.4 and ≤3.4) and the moderate I (>3.4 and ≤4.4); the moderate I (>3.4 and ≤4.4) and the moderate II (>4.4) groups; correlation between NPI score and RS for patients with the good group [Pearson r = 0.399 (p = 0.434)]; correlation between NPI score and RS for patients with the moderate I group [Pearson r = 0.025 (p = 0.945)]; correlation between NPI score and RS for patients with the moderate II group [Pearson r = 0.294 (p = 0.185)] RS = recurrence score generated through OncotypeDX testing; RS cutoff: for pN0 >50years high RS ≥ 26, and ≤50 years high RS ≥ 16, for pN1 pre- and postmenopausal high RS ≥ 26; NPI = Nottingham Prognostic Index.
In the published article, there was an error for Figure 2 as published. The correct Figure 2 corresponds to the image of Figure 3 as published.
FIGURE 2
The significant association between RS and categorised variables of characteristics (A) in pN0 cases: four characteristics (p-values for Ki-67 group, PR group and grade of Kruskal-Wallis; for clinical risk of Mann-Whitney) (B) in pN1 cases: one characteristic (p-value for number of nodes of ANOVA).
FIGURE 3
The significant association between RS and variables of characteristics by randomisation results of OOM (A) in pN0 cases: three characteristics; four characteristics in >50 years cohort (B) in pN1 cases: seven characteristics; eight characteristic in postmenopausal cohort.
In the published article, there was an error for Figure 3 as published. The correct Figure 3 corresponds to the image of Figure 2 as published.
All captions for Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 are correct as first published.
This does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Summary
Keywords
breast cancer, pathological characteristics, OncotypeDX, recurrence score, observation oriented modeling
Citation
Deme D, Tamaskovics BF, Jammoul N, Kovács S, Kayode KO, Grice JW and Telekes A (2024) Corrigendum: Association between pathological characteristics and recurrence score by OncotypeDX in resected T1-3 and N0-1 breast cancer: a real-life experience of a North Hungarian regional center. Pathol. Oncol. Res. 30:1611862. doi: 10.3389/pore.2024.1611862
Received
05 June 2024
Accepted
12 June 2024
Published
08 July 2024
Volume
30 - 2024
Edited by
Pathology and Oncology Research Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland
Updates
Copyright
© 2024 Deme, Tamaskovics, Jammoul, Kovács, Kayode, Grice and Telekes.
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: Dániel Deme, danieldeme_md@ymail.com
Disclaimer
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.