Corrigendum: A Real-World, Multicenter, Observational Retrospective Study of Durvalumab After Concomitant or Sequential Chemoradiation for Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (Front. Oncol., (2021), 11, (744956), 10.3389/fonc.2021.744956)

In the original article there was an error. The survival numbers were incorrect. A correction has been made to Abstract: “1-year PFS and OS were 83.5% (95%CI: 77.6-89.7) and 97.2% (95%CI: 94.6-99.9), respectively.” “1-year PFS and OS were 65.5% (95%CI: 57.6-74.4) and 87.9% (95%CI: 82.26.6-93.9), respectively” In the original article, there was an error. The survival numbers were incorrect. A correction has been made to Results, Survival: “PFS at 12, 18, and 24 months was 83.5% (95%CI: 77.6– 89.7), 65.5 (95%CI: 57.6–74.4), and 53.1% (95%CI: 43.8–64.3), respectively. (Figure 1). OS at 12, 18, and 24 months was 97.2% (95%CI: 94.6– 99.9), 87.9% (95%CI: 82.26–93.9), and 79.3% (95%CI: 71.1–88.4), respectively (Figure 1).” “PFS at 6, 12, and 18 months was 83.5% (95%CI: 77.6– 89.7), 65.5% (95%CI: 57.6–74.4), and 53.1% (95%CI: 43.8– 64.3), respectively. (Figure 1). OS at 6, 12, and 18 months was 97.2% (95%CI: 94.6– 99.9), 87.9% (95%CI: 82.26–93.9), and 79.3% (95%CI: 71.1–88.4), respectively (Figure 1)” In the original article, there was an error. The survival numbers were incorrect. A correction has been made to Discussion: “12-month PFS was 83.5%, and OS 97.2%” “12-month PFS was 65.5%, and OS 87.9%” 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

Corrigendum: A Real-World, Multicenter, Observational Retrospective Study of Durvalumab After Concomitant or Sequential Chemoradiation for Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (Front. Oncol., (2021), 11, (744956), 10.3389/fonc.2021.744956)

In the original article there was an error. The survival numbers were incorrect. A correction has been made to Abstract: “1-year PFS and OS were 83.5% (95%CI: 77.6-89.7) and 97.2% (95%CI: 94.6-99.9), respectively.” “1-year PFS and OS were 65.5% (95%CI: 57.6-74.4) and 87.9% (95%CI: 82.26.6-93.9), respectively” In the original article, there was an error. The survival numbers were incorrect. A correction has been made to Results, Survival: “PFS at 12, 18, and 24 months was 83.5% (95%CI: 77.6– 89.7), 65.5 (95%CI: 57.6–74.4), and 53.1% (95%CI: 43.8–64.3), respectively. (Figure 1). OS at 12, 18, and 24 months was 97.2% (95%CI: 94.6– 99.9), 87.9% (95%CI: 82.26–93.9), and 79.3% (95%CI: 71.1–88.4), respectively (Figure 1).” “PFS at 6, 12, and 18 months was 83.5% (95%CI: 77.6– 89.7), 65.5% (95%CI: 57.6–74.4), and 53.1% (95%CI: 43.8– 64.3), respectively. (Figure 1). OS at 6, 12, and 18 months was 97.2% (95%CI: 94.6– 99.9), 87.9% (95%CI: 82.26–93.9), and 79.3% (95%CI: 71.1–88.4), respectively (Figure 1)” In the original article, there was an error. The survival numbers were incorrect. A correction has been made to Discussion: “12-month PFS was 83.5%, and OS 97.2%” “12-month PFS was 65.5%, and OS 87.9%” 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