Front. Oncol.Frontiers in OncologyFront. Oncol.2234-943XFrontiers Media S.A.10.3389/fonc.2024.1397607OncologyCorrectionCorrigendum: Determining the predictive impact of donor parity on the outcomes of human leukocyte antigen matched hematopoietic stem cell transplants: a retrospective, single-center studyAzariMojtaba12BarkhordarMaryam12*BahriTanaz12*RadSoroush23Kamranzadeh FumaniHosein24MousaviSeied Asadollah12Tavakoli ShirajiSahar24AzariMorteza12ShafaroudiParisa12VaeziMohammad231Cell Therapy and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran2Research Institute for Oncology, Hematology, and Cell Therapy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran3Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran4Hematologic Malignancies Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran
Edited and Reviewed by: Salvatore Leotta, Independent Researcher, Catania, Italy
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.
A Corrigendum on Determining the predictive impact of donor parity on the outcomes of human leukocyte antigen matched hematopoietic stem cell transplants: a retrospective, single-center study by Azari M, Barkhordar M, Bahri T, Rad S, Kamranzadeh Fumani H, Mousavi SA, Tavakoli Shiraji S, Azari M, Shafaroudi P and Vaezi M (2024) Determining the predictive impact of donor parity on the outcomes of human leukocyte antigen matched hematopoietic stem cell transplants: a retrospective, single-center study. Front. Oncol. 14:1339605. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1339605graft-versus-host disease (GVHD)hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT)donor parityoverall survivalrelapse incidencesection-in-acceptanceHematologic Malignancies
In the published article, there was an error in Table 1 as published. In Table 1, Characteristic column, Primary disease classification section (4th row, 2nd column), “AML” and “ALL” have been miswritten interchangeably. The corrected Table 1 and its caption appear below.
Baseline characteristics of donors and recipients.
Characteristic
Donor Sex/Parity
Parous female
Male
Nulliparous female
Total
Donor age, n (%)
< 32
36 (6.90%)
283 (53.90%)
206 (39.20%)
525 (47.60%)
≥ 32
152 (26.30%)
338 (58.50%)
88 (15.20%)
578 (52.40%)
Recipients’ age, n (%)
< 32
53 (10.20%)
283 (54.20%)
186 (35.60%)
522 (47.30%)
≥ 32
135 (23.20%)
338 (58.20%)
108 (18.60%)
581 (52.70%)
Recipients’ sex, n (%)
Female
80 (18.30%)
238 (54.30%)
120 (27.40%)
438 (39.70%)
Male
108 (16.20%)
383 (57.60%)
174 (26.20%)
665 (60.30%)
Primary disease, n (%)
ALL
51 (12.30%)
221 (53.30%)
143 (34.50%)
415 (37.62%)
AML
137 (19.90%)
400 (58.10%)
151 (21.90%)
688 (62.38%)
ABO matching, n (%)
Matched
104 (15.71%)
387 (58.46%)
171 (25.83%)
662 (60%)
Minor mismatch
42 (22.82%)
94 (51.09%)
48 (26.09%)
184 (16.7%)
Major mismatch
35 (18.14%)
96 (49.74%)
62 (32.12%)
193 (17.5%)
Bidirectional
7 (10.94%)
44 (68.75%)
13 (20.31%)
64 (5.8%)
Disease status, n (%)
CR1
148 (17.67%)
471 (56.20%)
219 (26.13%)
838 (76%)
CR≥ 2
35 (13.83%)
145 (57.31%)
73 (28.86%)
253 (22.9%)
Graft cell dose, mean ± SD
CD34 cells
5.29 ± 2.53
6.04 ± 6.44
6.26 ± 20.99
5.97 ± 11.84
CD3 cells
292.39 ± 83.27
278.62 ± 101.91
307.20 ± 122.48
288.54 ± 105.71
Total, n (%)
188 (17.00%)
621 (56.30%)
294 (26.70%)
1103 (100%)
AML indicates acute myeloid leukemia; ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, CR, complete remission.
In the published article, there were some errors in the Text of Abstract, Methods and Materials, and Results section. In the final manuscript we updated the Tables and Figures according to our final analysis. However, in the text of the manuscript in some places (mainly Multivariable Cox regression analyses for the outcomes in the Results section) we did not update the text according to our final Analysis, Tables, and Figures.
A correction has been made to Abstract section, Results subsection. This sentence previously stated:
“188 (17.04%) had…”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“188 (17%) had…”
A correction has been made to Methods and Materials section, Outcomes and definitions subsection, first paragraph.
This sentence previously stated: “3-year extensive cGVHD”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“1-year extensive cGVHD”
A correction has been made to Results section, first paragraph, line 2. This sentence previously stated: “188 (17.04%) of these patients…”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“188 (17%) of these patients…”
A correction has been made to Results section, third paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 1.48, P= 0.02)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 1.53, P= 0.03)”
A correction has been made to Results section, third paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 4.14, P= 0.00)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 3.90, P= 0.00)”
A correction has been made to Results section, third paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 4.46, P= 0.00)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 4.62, P= 0.00)”
A correction has been made to Results section, fourth paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “Additional factors associated with higher RI in univariate analysis were recipient age and sex (male vs. female), as well as disease status of second complete remission and above (≥ CR2) before transplant.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“Additional factors associated with higher RI in univariate analysis were recipient age and sex (male vs. female), as well as primary disease of AML and disease status of second complete remission and above (≥ CR2) before transplant.”
A correction has been made to Results section, fourth paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 1.38, P= 0.01 and HR= 1.87, P= 0.00, respectively)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 1.38, P= 0.01 and HR= 1.86, P= 0.00, respectively)”
A correction has been made to Results section, fourth paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 0.57, P= 0.00 and HR= 0.61, P= 0.02, respectively)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 0.61, P= 0.02 and HR= 0.58, P= 0.00, respectively)”
A correction has been made to Results section, fifth paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 0.81, P= 0.01)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 0.83, P= 0.02)”
A correction has been made to Results section, fifth paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 1.25, P= 0.01 and HR= 2.49, P= 0.00, respectively)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 1.30, P= 0.00 and HR= 2.26, P= 0.00, respectively)”
A correction has been made to Results section, sixth paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 0.63, P= 0.00)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 0.64, P= 0.00)”
A correction has been made to Results section, sixth paragraph. This sentence previously stated: “(HR= 1.44 and HR= 1.61, respectively)”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“(HR= 1.40 and HR= 1.59, respectively)”
As published, there were errors in the Discussion section. As the results obtained by Kumar et al. may be misinterpreted by us, we have deleted reference 21 and its results from the mentioned parts in our Discussion section of published article. A correction has been made to the Discussion section, third paragraph. This sentence previously stated:
“Przepiorka et al. (17) and Kumar et al. (21) observed that the gestation history of the donor did not affect the hazard for grade II-IV aGVHD incidence in recipients of HLA-matched related donors.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“Przepiorka et al. (17) observed that the gestation history of the donor did not affect the hazard for grade II-IV aGVHD incidence in recipients of HLA-matched related donors.”
A correction has been made to the Discussion section, paragraph 4. The sentence previously stated: “The analysis by Loren et al. (2) and Kumar et al. (21) also did not find any effect of donor parity on OS among the patients who underwent the HSCT from HLA-identical siblings in the multivariate model fitted.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“The analysis by Loren et al. (2) also did not find any effect of donor parity on OS among the patients who underwent the HSCT from HLA-identical siblings in the multivariate model fitted.”
These errors do not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way.
The authors apologize for these errors and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher’s note
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.