CA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVECOVER ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Erratum for Greenlee et al., CA Cancer J Clin 51 (1) 15-36.
Erratum for Smith et al., CA Cancer J Clin 51 (1) 38-75.
CA Cancer J Clin 2001; 51:373

© 2001 American Cancer Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a letter to the editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content

Errata

In the January/February 2001 issue, in the article "Cancer Statistics, 2001" (Greenlee RT, Hill-Harmon MB, Murray T, Thun M. CA Cancer J Clin 2001;51:15-36), an error occurred in Figure 10Go (page 34). The colors indicating distant stage statistics for melanoma of the skin (black and white), oral cavity & pharynx (white), ovary (white), and prostate (black) were printed incorrectly; however, the numerical data listed was correct.


Figure 10
View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[PowerPoint slide for Educational Purposes]
  		FIGURE 10 Five-Year Relative Survival Rates by Race and Stage at Diagnosis, US, 1989-1996

*The standard error is between five and 10 percentage points.

{dagger}The standard error is greater than 10 percentage points.

{ddagger}The rate for local stage represents local and regional stages combined.

§ Statistic could not be calculated.

Note: Staging according to SEER historic stage categories rather than the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system. Data Source: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program 1973-1997, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, 2000.

 
Figure 10Go is reproduced here and reflects the correct color for distant stage statistics according to the key. We apologize for the error and any confusion this may have caused.

In the January/February 2001 issue, in the article "American Cancer Society Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer: Update of Early Detection Guidelines for Prostate, Colorectal, and Endometrial Cancers" (Smith RA, von Eschenbach AC, Wender R, et al. CA Cancer J Clin 2001;51:38-75), an error occurred in Table 2 (page 48).

The first footnote which begins: "If colonoscopy is unavailable, not feasible, or not desired by the patient, double contrast barium enema alone, or the combination of flexible sigmoidoscopy and double barium enema are acceptable alternatives..." should have been denoted by * instead of 1. We apologize for the error and any confusion this may have caused.





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a letter to the editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVECOVER ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS