Correction: Early biomarkers of extracapsular extension of prostate cancer using MRI-derived semantic features

Correction: Cancer Imaging 22, 74 (2022)

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-022-00509-8

The original publication of this article [1] contained several consistency errors. The incorrect and correct information is shown below

Abstract

Incorrect

• The study participants included 184 patients who had undergone RARP at our institution, 26% of whom were pECE + (i.e., pECE positive). Significant predictors of pECE + were TCCL, capsular disruption, measurable ECE on MRI, and a GS of ≥ 7(4 + 3) on a prostate biopsy.

Correct

• The study participants included 185 patients who had undergone RARP at our institution, 26% of whom were pECE + (i.e., pECE positive). Significant predictors of pECE + were TCCL, capsular disruption, measurable ECE on MRI, and a GS of ≥ 7(4 + 3) on a prostate biopsy.

Materials and methods

Incorrect

• This study included 257 participants, all of whom were patients diagnosed with PCa between 2015 and 2018.

• The exclusion criteria (Fig. 1) led to 72 patients being excluded, leaving only 185 patients for analysis.

Correct

• This study included 237 participants, all of whom were patients diagnosed with PCa between 2015 and 2018.

• The exclusion criteria (Fig. 1) led to 52 patients being excluded, leaving only 185 patients for analysis.

Results

Incorrect

• For every increase of one millimeter in the capsular contact length, the odds of presenting pECE + increases by 9% compared with patients with no contact capsular length.

Correct

• For every increase of one millimeter in the capsular contact length, the odds of presenting pECE + increases by 9.7% compared with patients with no contact capsular length.

Incorrect

• The odds of presenting pECE + were 3.3, 5.5, and 6.2 times higher in patients with capsular disruption, measurable ECE on MRI, and a GSs of ≥ (4 + 3), respectively, compared to patients without these characteristics.

Correct

• The odds of presenting pECE + were 3.0, 5.2, and 6.2 times higher in patients with capsular disruption, measurable ECE on MRI, and a GSs of ≥ (4 + 3), respectively, compared to patients without these characteristics.

Incorrect

• To evaluate the performance of the multivariable logistic regression model, we computed the ROC curve and the AUC. The estimated model shows a good performance in distinguishing pECE + patients from pECE − patients, with an AUC of 0.90 (86.0–95.8%), a high sensitivity (93%), and moderate specificity (70%) (Table 3).

Correct

• To evaluate the performance of the multivariable logistic regression model, we computed the ROC curve and the AUC. The estimated model shows a good performance in distinguishing pECE + patients from pECE − patients, with an AUC of 0.91 (85.3–94.5%), a high sensitivity (86%), and moderate specificity (78%) (Table 3).

Figure 4 caption

Incorrect

• Gleason score less aggressive: < 7(3 + 4)

Correct

• Gleason score less aggressive: < 7 (4 + 3)