Correction to: Rautenberg T, Siebert U, Arnold D, et al. Economic outcomes of sequences which include monoclonal antibodies against vascular endothelial growth factor and/or epidermal growth factor receptor for the treatment of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. J Med Econ 2014;17:99-110
Following publication of this article and the subsequent erratum, the authors have been made aware of additional errors in the conclusion section of both the abstract and the main body. The errors are as follows:
Current conclusion in abstract: ‘Clinical sequences consisting of 1L and 2L line bevacizumab followed by 3L anti-EGFR potentially yield the greatest health outcomes associated with a reasonable trade-off in additional cost when replacing 1L anti-EGFRs and are potentially cost-saving if replacing 2L anti-EGFRs, per patient per lifetime. To maximize health outcomes, optimal sequences include anti-EGFRs as 3L regimen, with an approximately equivalent trade-off in costs between the most costly (anti-EGFR 2L) and least costly (anti-EGFR 1L) sequences.’
Corrected conclusion in abstract: ‘Clinical sequences consisting of 1L and 2L line bevacizumab followed by 3L anti-EGFR potentially yield the greatest health outcomes associated with a reasonable trade-off in additional cost when replacing 2L anti-EGFRs and are potentially cost-saving if replacing 1L anti-EGFRs, per patient per lifetime. To maximize health outcomes, optimal sequences include anti-EGFRs as 3L regimen, with an approximately equivalent trade-off in costs between the most costly (anti-EGFR 1L) and least costly (anti-EGFR 2L) sequences.’
Current conclusion in main body: ‘Clinical sequences consisting of 1L and 2L line bevacizumab followed by 3L anti-EGFR potentially yield the greatest health outcomes associated with a reasonable trade-off in additional cost when replacing 1L anti-EGFRs and are potentially cost-saving if replacing 2L anti-EGFRs, per patient per lifetime. To maximize health outcomes, optimal sequences include anti-EGFRs as 3L regimen, with an approximately equivalent trade-off in costs between the most costly (anti-EGFR 2L) and least costly (anti-EGFR 1L) sequences.’
Corrected conclusion in main body: ‘Clinical sequences consisting of 1L and 2L line bevacizumab followed by 3L anti-EGFR potentially yield the greatest health outcomes associated with a reasonable trade-off in additional cost when replacing 2L anti-EGFRs and are potentially cost-saving if replacing 1L anti-EGFRs, per patient per lifetime. To maximize health outcomes, optimal sequences include anti-EGFRs as 3L regimen, with an approximately equivalent trade-off in costs between the most costly (anti-EGFR 1L) and least costly (anti-EGFR 2L) sequences.’