Search

Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified that affiliation 1 was not mentioned correctly. It is now: 1 Laboratory of Experimental Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi—Sant’Ambrogio, Via Cristina Belgioioso 173, 20157 Milan, Italy. 1 Laboratory of Experimental Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi—Sant’Ambrogio, Via Cristina Belgioioso 173, 20157 Milan, Italy. It should be as per below: 1 Laboratory of Experimental Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Via Cristina Belgioioso 173, 20157 Milan, Italy. 1 Laboratory of Experimental Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Via Cristina Belgioioso 173, 20157 Milan, Italy. The original article was updated.

Zeng M, Wang Y, Liu M, et al. Int J Nanomedicine. 2023;18:6503–6525. The authors have advised that Figure 2 on page 6510 was published in error. The correct Figure 2 is as follows. Figure 2 HM-CDs significantly improved blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability. HM-CD-1 has an ultra-tiny size and abundance surface functional groups. The covalent binding of HM-CD-2 to the drug facilitates passive transport of the drug. HM-CD-3 has a strong affinity for the BBB endothelial cell membrane. The authors apologize for this error.

Ye J, Li R, Cheng J, et al. Int J Nanomedicine. 2022;17:6047–6064. The authors have advised that there is an error in Figure 9 on page 6060 of the published paper. Due to an error that occurred inadvertently at the time of figure assembly, figure part D is incorrect. Although it does not affect the conclusion that AmB nanoformulations can significantly promote macrophage proliferation when incubated with high concentrations, it is an obvious mistake. The correct Figure 9 is as follows. Figure 9 Continued. Figure 9 In vitro cytotoxicity of AmB injection, AmB-CSC, and AmB-Lipo in murine RAW264.7 macrophages. The murine RAW264.7 macrophages were treated with AmB injection (A), AmB-CSC (C), and AmB-Lipo (E) at AmB concentrations of 0.1–50 µg/mL for 24 h and the cell viability was determined using CCK-8 kits. Each value represents the mean ± SEM (n = 6). ***p < 0.001 compared with the control (Ctrl) group. The cell morphology of RAW264.7 macrophages after incubation with AmB injection (B), AmB-CSC (D), and AmB-Lipo (F) was observed by Cell Imaging Multimode Reader (Cytation 5, BioTek).Abbreviations: AmB, amphotericin B; AmB-CSC, AmB cholesteryl sulfate complex; AmB-Lipo, AmB liposome; SEM, standard error of the mean. The authors apologise for this error.

Wang L, Li D, Hao Y, et al. Int J Nanomedicine. 2017;12:3059-3075. The authors have advised Figures 9 and 11 on pages 3070 and 3071, respectively, are incorrect. The H&E staining image of tumor tissue in the PLGA/DTX@MnO2 group in Figure 9C and the X-ray CT images in Figure 11C were inadvertently misused during data acquisition. The correct Figure 9 is as follows. Figure 9 Inhibition of tumor growth in vivo by the drug delivery system.Abbreviations: H&E, hematoxylin and eosin; AuNR, gold nanorod; DTX, docetaxel; MnO2, manganese dioxide; PLGA, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid); RF, radiofrequency.Notes: (A) Relative volumes of tumor-bearing mice; (B) body weight of the mice models (mean ± standard deviation; n=6); (C) H&E-stained tumor tissue sections: (a) control, (b) DTX, (c) PLGA/DTX@MnO2, (d) PLGA/DTX@MnO2 + RF, (e) PLGA/AuNR/DTX@MnO2, and (f) PLGA/AuNR/DTX@MnO2 + RF. The correct Figure 11 is as follows. Figure 11 Dual-mode imaging in vivo.Abbreviations: MR, magnetic resonance; CT, computed tomography.Notes: (A, B) T1-weighted MR images; (C) X-ray CT images: (a) control; (b) 4 h; (c) 8 h. The authors apologize for these errors and advise they do not affect the results and conclusions of the paper.

Megna M, Ruggiero A, Salsano A, et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2023;16:3503–3507. The authors have advised that the study did not receive any funding. The funding statement “Medical writing was funded through a donation by Abbvie Srl” on page 3506 should be removed. The authors apologize for this error.

Zhang J, Gu D, Yan Y, et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2024;17:1405–1412. The authors have advised that they neglected to include a funding statement on page 1411 of the published paper. The funding statement should read as follows. FundingThis work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.82304056). The authors apologize for this error.

Huang J, Shao F, Chen B, Zheng G, Shen J, Qiu S. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2023;19:2709–2728. The authors have advised that the funding statement on page 2727 is incorrect. The text “(No. 202107071918000249496)” should read “(No. 20201203B59)”. The authors apologize for this error.

Pourafshar S, Parikh M, Abdallah B, Al Thubian N, Jacobson JW. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2024;18:531–541. Page 532, Materials and Methods, Capillary Blood Collection section, lines 3 and 4, the text “and EDTA tubes (intended for hemoglobin and hematocrit [“H&H;” see below] testing)” should read “and H&H tubes (intended for hemoglobin and hematocrit testing)”. Page 533, second bullet point, lines 1 and 2, the text “(FDA approved on 11/27/23)” should read “(FDA cleared on 11/27/23)”. The authors apologize for these errors.

Li J, Zhou C. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2024;17:1329–1332. The authors have advised that they neglected to include a funding statement on page 1331 of the published paper. The funding statement should read as follows. FundingThis study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.82073459, No.82373504). The authors apologize for this error.

Paduca A, Lundmark PO, Bruenech JR. Clin Ophthalmol. 2023;17:1395-1405. Page 1396, Materials and Methods, first paragraph, line 4 the text “recession/resection surgery” should read “recession/resection surgery for the first time”. Page 1396, Materials and Methods, first paragraph, line 5, the text “intermittent” should read “intermittent with alphabetical pattern”. The authors apologize for this error.

Strange C, Tkacz J, Schinkel J, et al. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2023;18:2245–2256. The authors have advised that there are errors in the 95% CI interval values on page 2248. Results, Baseline and Follow-Up Exacerbation Rates, sentence 3, the text “Relative rates of total exacerbations for prompt were 0.76, 95% CI: (0.72 – 0.79) and 0.66, 95% CI: (0.63 – 0.69) versus delayed and very delayed” should read “Relative rates of total exacerbations for prompt were 0.76, 95% CI: (0.69 – 0.83) and 0.66, 95% CI: (0.60 – 0.72) versus delayed and very delayed”. Results, Baseline and Follow-Up Exacerbation Rates, sentence 5, the text “Relative rates of severe exacerbations for prompt were 0.75 (95% CI: 0.67-0.90) and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.29-0.47) versus delayed and very delayed” should read “Relative rates of severe exacerbations for prompt were 0.75 (95% CI: 0.45-1.15) and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.22-0.55) versus delayed and very delayed”. The authors apologize for these errors and confirm that the overarching interpretation of the results and conclusions of the study remain consistent with the originally published article and no other text or figures are affected.

Rosero ID, Barreto J, Cardona C, Ordoñez-Mora LT. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2022;15:2399–2412. The authors have advised there is an error in the author list on page 2399. The author name “Carlos Cardona” should read “Carlos Basto-Cardona”. The authors apologize for this error.

Younis AS, Julaidan GS, Alsuwaylimi RA, et al. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2024;17:1083–1092. Page 1085, Results, lines 5 and 6, the text “Higher education was attained by more than two-thirds of the fathers (n=335, 69.7%)” should read “Higher education was attained by three-quarters of the fathers (n=335, 75.8%)”. Page 1085, Results, line 6, the text “42.2% of them owned their homes” should read “43.2% of them owned their homes”. Page 1086, Table 1, Expected fetus gender, Male row, the text “179 (40.3)” should read “178 (40.3)”. The authors apologize for these errors.

Huang CH, Wu HH, Lee YC, Li X. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2024;17:513–523. The authors have advised that the affiliation list on page 513 is incorrect. Affiliation list number 6, the text “Hung Kuang University” should read “Hungkuang University”. The authors have also advised that the correspondence address on page 513 is incorrect. The text “Hung Kuang University, No. 34 Zhongqi Road, Shalu District, Taichung City, Taiwan” should read “Hungkuang University, No. 1018, Sec. 6, Taiwan Boulevard, Shalu District, Taichung City 433304, Taiwan”. The authors apologise for this error.

Zeng Q, Sun Q, Xu H, et al. J Inflamm Res. 2023;16:3455-3468 The authors have advised there is an error in the author list and affiliations on page 3455. Minwei Jin’s affiliation should read “Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China” The corrected author list and affiliations is: Qinghe Zeng 1,2,*, Qi Sun3,*, Huihui Xu 1,2,*, Jiali Chen1, Houfu Ling4, Qinwen Ge1,2, Kaiao Zou1,2, Xu Wang1,2, Hongting Jin1, Ju Li4,*, Minwei Jin5,* 1Institute of Orthopedics and Traumatology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China; 2The First College of Clinical Medicine, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China; 3Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Fuyang Orthopaedics and Traumatology Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People’s Republic of China; 4Department of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China; 5Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China *These authors contributed equally to this work

Xie NQ, Zhang YL, Zheng ZL, Zheng QL, Chen RJ. J Inflamm Res. 2023;16:6319–6328. The authors have advised that they neglected to include a funding statement on page 6327 of the published paper. The funding statement should read as follows. FundingThis work was supported by Quanzhou Medical College research project (XYL2305). The authors apologize for this error.

Pei H, Qu J, Chen J, Zhao G, Lu Z. J Inflamm Res. 2024;17:4483–4503. The authors advised that Figure 8A on page 4496 has an error in the merge image of S100A9KD-lps group. The correct Figure 8 is as follows. Figure 8 S100A9 induces mitochondrial damage and energy metabolism impairment. (A) MMP fluorescence staining by TMRE probe (red) and Hoechst 33342 (blue). (B and C) Flow cytometry detection of TMRE fluorescence intensity in H9C2 cells. (D and E) Detection of intracellular and extracellular ATP content by fluorescence luminescence method. (F–H) Mitochondrial mRNA transcript levels of TFAM, TFBM, ATP6, ATP8, COX1, COX2 and COX3 by qPCR. The above statistical results were compared with the corresponding control group. *P<0.05. **P<0.01, ***P<0.001.Abbreviations: Con, Control; LPS, Lipopolysaccharides; NC, negative control; OV, Overexpression of S100A9 gene; KD, Knockdown of S100A9 gene; TMRE, tetramethylrhodamine, specifically recognize mitochondrial membrane potentials; MMP, mitochondrial membrane potential. The authors apologize for this error and advise it does not change the results and conclusion for this paper.

In the published article, there was an error in affiliation 8. Instead of “Division of Early Drug Development, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy”, it should be “Division of Early Drug Development, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy”. The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

In Table 2 of this article (Janiri et al. 2024), the data in the row headed "lithium responders" were mistakenly listed under the row headed "non-responders" and vice versa. The corrected version of Table 2 is given in this correction. (Table presented.) Psychopathological dimensions, temperament traits and childhood trauma according to lithium response (n = 201) Lithium non-responders (n = 140) Lithium responders (n = 61) df Cyclothymic 5.08 ± 3.78 5.07 ± 3.20 0.001 1 0.981 Dysthymic 3.35 ± 2.48 2.75 ± 2.16 2.63 1 0.106 Irritable 1.72 ± 1.96 2.80 ± 2.50 10.33 1 Hyperthymic 3.59 ± 2.32 4.78 ± 2.17 11.39 1 Anxious 1.30 ± 1.21 1.52 ± 1.31 1.27 1 0.260 Emotional abuse 9.94 ± 5.30 7.61 ± 3.47 9.87 1 Physical abuse 7.74 ± 4.27 5.96 ± 2.19 9.49 1 Sexual abuse 6.94 ± 3.64 5.70 ± 1.50 6.49 1 Emotional neglect 12.03 ± 5.18 10.49 ± 4.98 3.78 1 0.053 Physical neglect 7.89 ± 3.08 7.06 ± 2.41 3.45 1 0.065 Attentional 15.84 ± 3.93 15.18 ± 3.58 1.10 1 0.295 Motor 22.09 ± 4.71 21.35 ± 4.12 1.01 1 0.316 Non-planning 26.81 ± 5.05 25.80 ± 5.46 1.45 1 0.230 Total 64.80 ± 10.66 62.33 ± 10.36 2.08 1 0.151 Physical 17.12 ± 7.04 16.58 ± 5.84 0.235 1 0.628 Verbal 14.70 ± 4.34 13.85 ± 3.49 1.64 1 0.202 Anger 16.78 ± 5.52 16.87 ± 4.96 0.01 1 0.920 Hostility 20.56 ± 6.74 19.59 ± 5.37 0.89 1 0.347 Total 69.05 ± 18.63 67.28 ± 15.23 0.384 1 0.536 df degrees of freedom, P significance level, SD standard deviation, TEMPS-A-SF Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris and San Diego-Autoquestionnaire, short form, CTQ-SF Childhood Trauma Questionnaire short form, BIS Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, AQ Aggression Questionnaire *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

Zheng Y, Zhu R, Xiao C, et al. J Pain Res. 2023;16:2205–2216. The authors have advised that they neglected to include a funding statement on page 2215 of the published paper. The funding statement should read as follows. Funding This work was supported by the Technology Innovation Project of Science and Technology Bureau of Chengdu (2022-YF05-01691-SN) and Clinical Research Project of West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University (LCYJ-2023-YY-2). The authors apologize for this error.

Xu L, Li Y, He Y, et al. J Pain Res. 2024;17:643–666. The authors have advised Figure 1 on page 645 is incorrect. Due to an error at the time of resubmission Figure 1 and Figure 2 were inadvertently duplicated. The correct Figure 1 is shown below. Figure 1 The flow chart of the screening process. The authors apologize for the error.

Guo P, Huang C, Yang Q, et al. Int J Nanomedicine. 2023;18:7759-7784. The authors have advised the correspondence section on page 7759 is incorrect. The correct correspondence address is as follows. Correspondence: Yan Qu, State Key Laboratory of Southwestern Chinese Medicine Resources, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 610072, People’s Republic of China, Email quyan028@126.com The authors apologize for this error.

Somnuke P, Kitisin N, Chumklud P, et al. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2022;18:1049–1057. The authors have advised that there is an error in the Materials and Methods, Study Design section. Page 1050, first paragraph, line three, the text “(approval number SI188/2564)” should read “(approval number Si 342/2021)”. The authors apologize for this error.

Enright KM, Weiner SF, Durairaj KK, Gilardino MS, Nikolis A. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2024;17:89-101. Page 93, Results, Hydrating HA section, first sentence, the text “Restylane-L (HAREST), Restylane Skinboosters Vital Light (HASBVL), Restylane Skinboosters Vital (HASBV), Restylane Lyft (HAL) (Figure 1, parts A-D)” should read “Restylane-L (HAREST), Restylane Skinboosters Vital Light (HASBVL), and Restylane Skinboosters Vital (HASBV) (Figure 1, parts A-C)”. Page 93, Results, Hydrating HA section, third sentence, the text “The fillers that did expand (swell) as they bound water included HAL, Restylane Defyne (HAD), Restylane Volume (HAV), Restylane Kysse (HAK), and Restylane Refyne (HAR) (Figure 1, parts E-H)” should read “The fillers that did expand (swell) as they bound water included Restylane Lyft (HAL), Restylane Defyne (HAD), Restylane Volume (HAV), Restylane Kysse (HAK), and Restylane Refyne (HAR) (Figure 1, parts D-H)”. The authors apologize for these errors.

Thongmee W, Padungkiatsagul T, Jindahra P, Khongkhatithum C, Thampratankul L, Vanikieti K. Clin Ophthalmol. 2020;14:4271–4278. Table 5 on page 4276, the 95% CI and the p-value for the Time from initial ocular symptoms (pain and/or visual loss) to IVMP in each affected eye (days) row are incorrect. Table 5 on page 4276, the 95% CI and the p-value for the BCVA at nadir better than CF row are incorrect. The correct Table 5 is shown below. Table 5 Univariate Analysis The authors apologize for these errors and advise they do not affect the conclusions of the study.

Tuli HS, Garg VK, Mehta JK, et al. Onco Targets Ther. 2022;15:1419–1448. The authors have advised affiliation 9 on page 1419 is incorrect. The correct affiliation should read “9CytoGene Research & Development LLP, Barabanki, Uttar Pradesh, India”. The authors apologize for this error.