Blood online
Home About Blood Authors Subscriptions Permission Advertising Public Access contact us
 

 
Advanced
Current Issue
First Edition
Future Articles
Archives
Submit to Blood
Search
American Society of Hematology
Meeting Abstracts
Email Alerts
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

arrow to previous article Previous Article  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Article next article arrow

Blood, Vol. 96 No. 3 (August 1), 2000: pp. 807-807

ERRATUM

In the article by Brugger et al entitled "Positively selected autologous blood CD34+ cells and unseparated peripheral blood progenitor cells mediate identical hematopoietic engraftment after high-dose VP16, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and epirubicin," which appeared in the September 1, 1994, issue of Blood (84:1421-1426), there were 2 omissions.

  Figures 1 and 2 contained hematopoietic recovery data not from all 15 study patients, as the text suggests, but from only 12 study patients. In fact, at the time of submission, all 15 patients had been transplanted and all had recovered. The 3 additional patients all had rapid recovery of neutrophils and platelets (upper range of time to recovery) when compared to the other patients. Reanalysis of the original data of all 15 study patients indicates that the conclusions are clearly the same. The time of platelet count > 50,000/µL and the time to absolute neutrophil count > 500/µL should have read 16 (11-24) days (not 15 (10-20), as shown in the publication) and 12 (10-18) days (not 12 (8-16) days), respectively. The reanalysis of the "yield of CD34+cells" after column separation revealed that not all 21 patients contributed to this number, as suggested by Table 2. Actually, very "high" levels of yield (eg, 629%) were not considered for analysis. This was not stated and explained in the paper.

  Also, it was not stated in the paper that the median blood counts after hematopoietic engraftment were not derived from all patients. In this clinical phase I/II study with advanced disease patients, the patients were discharged from the hospital as early as possible, depending on the clinical performance, achievement of neutrophil regeneration (> 500/µL), and platelet transfusion independency. Note: Submitted December 20, 1999.---Ed.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

 click for free articles
home about blood authors subscriptions permissions advertising public access contact us
  Copyright © 2000 by American Society of Hematology         Online ISSN: 1528-0020