Errors in Abstract and Results

Abstract

there were discrepancies between the published data and updated analysis with regard to the evaluation of fluorine 18-labeled fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography.In the Abstract, the sentence given with "a relative decrease of maximum standardized uptake value by more than 31.3% (median) was associated with pCR (odds ratio, 6.67, 95% CI, 2.38-20.00; P < .001)" has been updated to "a relative decrease of maximum standardized uptake value equal or greater than 68.7% (median) was associated with pCR (odds ratio, 6.74; 95% CI, 2.75-16.51; P < .001)."In the Results, the following sentence appeared: "Using the median decrease by the relative change of the maximum standardized uptake value from baseline to cycle 2 of 31.3% as a cutoff, a decrease of the maximum standardized up-take value by more than 31.3% was associated with pCR in 79.6% of patients (43 of 54) compared with 42.6% of patients (23 of 54) with a relative change of the maximum standardized uptake value from baseline to cycle 2 of 31.3% or less, irrespective of treatment group (OR, 6.67; 95% CI, 2.38-20.00; P < .001)."This sentence has been corrected to read: "Using the median decrease by the relative change of the maximum standardized uptake value from baseline to cycle 2 of 68.7% as a cutoff, a decrease of the maximum standardized uptake value equal or greater than 68.7% was associated with pCR in 57.4% of patients (31 of 54) compared with 16.7% of patients (9 of 54) with a decrease less than 68.7% (OR, 6.74; 95% CI, 2.75-16.51; P < .001)."This article has been corrected online. 1.Hatschek T, Foukakis T, Bjöhle J, et al. Neoadjuvant trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and docetaxel vs trastuzumab emtansine in patients with ERBB2-positive breast cancer: a phase 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol.