Continuous low-dose therapy with vinblastine and VEGF receptor-2 antibody induces sustained tumor regression without overt toxicity
http://www.100md.com
《神经病学神经外科学杂志》
Original Citation: J. Clin. Invest. 105:R15–R24 (2000).
Citation for this corrigendum: J. Clin. Invest. 116:2827 (2006). doi:10.1172/JCI08829C1.
The fluorescent image in Figure 3 that depicts TUNEL assay in vinblastine-treated tumors was incorrect. It was a rotated duplication of the depiction of the DC101 anti-VEGFR-2 antibody–treated group that appeared in the panel immediately above.
The vinblastine fluorescence panel has therefore been eliminated in the corrected figure below. The text of the legend should read as follows: "In both single-treatment groups (vinblastine [data not shown] and DC101), widening of the apoptotic rims and extension of the apoptotic figures into the cuff was observed after 35 and 50 days of treatment, respectively." The corrected figure appears below.
The authors regret this error.
We also wish to make clear the legend of Figure 4 with respect to the source of the images to avoid any possibility of misleading readers. Specifically, parts A, C, and E are enlarged, and parts A and C are rotated versions of the respective H&E panels in Figure 3. The second sentence of the legend should read as follows: "H&E stain of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded sections of human neuroepithelioma SK-N-MC images from Figure 3 were magnified and complemented with an additional 3 panels to demonstrate more clearly the progressive damage to endothelial cells caused by the respective therapy treatments."
The authors regret any inconvenience this may have caused.(Giannoula Klement, Sylvai)
Citation for this corrigendum: J. Clin. Invest. 116:2827 (2006). doi:10.1172/JCI08829C1.
The fluorescent image in Figure 3 that depicts TUNEL assay in vinblastine-treated tumors was incorrect. It was a rotated duplication of the depiction of the DC101 anti-VEGFR-2 antibody–treated group that appeared in the panel immediately above.
The vinblastine fluorescence panel has therefore been eliminated in the corrected figure below. The text of the legend should read as follows: "In both single-treatment groups (vinblastine [data not shown] and DC101), widening of the apoptotic rims and extension of the apoptotic figures into the cuff was observed after 35 and 50 days of treatment, respectively." The corrected figure appears below.
The authors regret this error.
We also wish to make clear the legend of Figure 4 with respect to the source of the images to avoid any possibility of misleading readers. Specifically, parts A, C, and E are enlarged, and parts A and C are rotated versions of the respective H&E panels in Figure 3. The second sentence of the legend should read as follows: "H&E stain of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded sections of human neuroepithelioma SK-N-MC images from Figure 3 were magnified and complemented with an additional 3 panels to demonstrate more clearly the progressive damage to endothelial cells caused by the respective therapy treatments."
The authors regret any inconvenience this may have caused.(Giannoula Klement, Sylvai)