Correction
for
Bain et al., J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 96 (11) 826-834.
JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2004 96(23):1796-1797; doi:10.1093/jnci/djh331
© 2004 by Oxford University Press
© 2004 Oxford University Press
Erratum
Erratum: "Lung Cancer Rates in Men and Women With Comparable
Histories of Smoking" by Bain et al. [J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:826–34
(Issue 11)]. On page 830, the data for time since quitting among
the past smokers in the male cohort were incorrect. This affected
the data in Tables
3 and
4. Corrected Tables
3 and
4 are below.
The rate ratio for lung cancer in female compared with male
past smokers changed to 1.3 (95% CI = 1.0 to 1.6) when standardized
for current age, number of cigarettes smoked per day before
quitting, age at start of smoking, and time since quitting (Table
3). In Cox proportional hazards models, the hazard ratio increased
to 1.50 (95% CI = 1.21 to 1.88) when controlled for these same
smoking factors, and it increased to 1.48 (95% CI = 1.19 to
1.83) when controlled for pack-years and time since quitting;
hazard ratios for ever smokers changed to 1.28 (95% CI = 1.09
to 1.51) and 1.18 (95% CI = 1.01 to 1.38), respectively (Table
4). As we reported in the published article, there is no statistically
significant sex difference in lung cancer incidence among the
current smokers. The authors regret the error.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3. Lung cancer incidence among former smokers in the Nurses’ Health Study Cohort of women and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study cohort of men, 1986–2000, according to number of cigarettes smoked per day before quitting, age at start of smoking, and number of years since quitting*
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 4. Hazard ratios for lung cancer for women in the Nurses’ Health Study cohort compared with men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study cohort, 1986–2000*
|
|
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
