Correction to: A Case-Control Study Examining Disparities in Clinical Trial Participation Among Breast Surgical Oncology Patients
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
This is a correction to: Oluwadamilola M. Fayanju, Yi Ren, Samantha M. Thomas, Rachel A. Greenup, Terry Hyslop, E. Shelley Hwang, John H. Stewart IV, A Case-Control Study Examining Disparities in Clinical Trial Participation Among Breast Surgical Oncology Patients, JNCI Cancer Spectrum, Volume 4, Issue 2, April 2020, pkz103, https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkz103.
In October 2024, a reader contacted the journal about a possible error in Table 1. After looking at their raw data, the authors confirmed that the data for Age Group (<40, 40-64, and ≥65 y) in the trial database (TDB) and National Cancer Database (NCDB) columns were inadvertently transposed. This error occurred when the authors were preparing a revised table.
A corrected Table 1 is included in this notice in which the same data are presented in the correct columns.
A correction to the Results section is also necessary. The sentences, “A higher proportion of trial participants were aged 65 years and older (38.1% vs 27.9%), white (83.5% vs 73.7%), and from areas with higher levels of educational attainment (eg, >93% HS education: 32.5% vs 27.4%) than the NCDB controls (both P < .001). Trial participants were also slightly younger (median = 58 vs 60 years, P < .001) and more likely to be from the Midwest (28.9% vs 25.4%)” should be corrected to “A higher proportion of trial participants were white (83.5% vs 73.7%) and from areas with higher levels of educational attainment (eg, >93% HS education: 32.5% vs 27.4%) than the NCDB controls (both P < .001). Trial participants were also slightly younger (median = 58 vs 60 years), with a lower proportion of patients aged 65 years and older (27.9% vs 38.1%), and they were more likely to be from the Midwest (28.9% vs 25.4%, all P < .001).”
The authors regret the error.
These details have been corrected only in this correction notice to preserve the published version of record.