Author Correction: Synergistic checkpoint-blockade and radiotherapy-radiodynamic therapy via an immunomodulatory nanoscale metal-organic framework.
Author Correction: Synergistic checkpoint-blockade and radiotherapy-radiodynamic therapy via an immunomodulatory nanoscale metal-organic framework.
复制标题
作者更正：通过免疫调节纳米级金属有机框架进行协同检查点阻断和放射治疗-放射动力学治疗。
DOI：
10.1038/s41551-022-00966-3
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
28.1
通讯作者：
Lin,Wenbin
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ni,Kaiyuan;Xu,Ziwan;Culbert,August;Luo,Taokun;Guo,Nining;Yang,Kaiting;Pearson,Erik;Preusser,Ben;Wu,Tong;LaRiviere,Patrick;Weichselbaum,RalphR;Spiotto,MichaelT;Lin,Wenbin
在本文最初发表的版本中，一些插图中的重复图像被无意中使用了。在图5G中，从BiDBP(-)+αPD-L1组中的图像错误地生成了αPD-L1(+)组的免疫荧光图像。原图和校正图如下(图1和图2)。我们亦获知补充资料中的数字有重复之处，并在彻底检查后，发现更多错误。这些补充数字的原始版本和更正版本作为补充资料转载于本修正案的网上版本。具体地说，补充图9a、10b、11b、12b、17、19、20、22c、43和46-48包含重复的图像，并且补充图14中的两个图像(对于bi-BDP组)被错误地替换。此外，对于补充图19的流式细胞术图，用于bi-DBP(-)组的代表性点图被错误地用作PBS(+)组(并且，在原始数据中，巨噬细胞的吞噬在PerCPCy5上被门控。5-F4/80，但这些文件被错误地标记为树突状细胞)。此外，对于补充图20，由于样本位置和原始数据标签的不对齐，相应的原始数据文件名被错误标记(并且在原始数据中，树突状细胞的吞噬作用在PECy5上被门控。5但文件被错误地标记为巨噬细胞)；对于这两个数字，我们用新的门控重新处理了原始数据，这也影响了图2K中的流式细胞仪曲线图(见下文图1)。所有这些错误都是在从采集、处理和存储的大数据集中选择具有代表性的图像或数据时发生的。我们已经检索了原始数据并更正了所有错误。然而，对于补充图12B(H_2DBP(-)和HF-DBP组之间的复制图像部分)、补充图17(PBS(-)和H_2DBP(+)组之间以及PBS(-)和Bi-DBP(-)组之间的复制图像部分)和补充图22C(用于肝组织的PBS(-)和H_2DBP(+)组之间以及H_2DBP(+)和B_i-DBP(+)组之间的复制图像部分)中的数据，我们找不到
In the version of this article originally published, duplicated images in some of the figures were inadvertently used. In Fig. 5g, the immunofluorescence image for the αPD-L1 (+) group was incorrectly generated from the image in the Bi-DBP (–)+ αPD-L1 group. The original and corrected figures are reproduced below (Figs. 1 and 2). We were also informed of duplications in figures in the Supplementary Information and, on thorough inspection, found additional errors. The original and corrected versions of these supplementary figures are reproduced as Supplementary Information in the online version of this amendment. Specifically, Supplementary Figs. 9a, 10b, 11b, 12b, 17, 19, 20, 22c, 43 and 46–48 contained duplicated images, and two images in Supplementary Fig. 14 (for the Bi-BDP group) had mistakenly been swapped.In addition, for the flow-cytometry plots of Supplementary Fig. 19 the representative dot plot for the Bi-DBP (–) group was mistakenly used for that of the PBS (+) group (also, in the raw data, the phagocytosis by macrophages was gated on PerCPCy5. 5-F4/80 but the files were incorrectly labelled for dendritic cells). Also, for Supplementary Fig. 20, the corresponding raw-data file names were mislabelled owing to a misalignment of sample positions and raw-data labels (and, in the raw data, the phagocytosis by dendritic cells was gated on PECy5. 5 but the files were incorrectly labelled for macrophages); for these two figures, we reprocessed the raw data with new gating, which also affects the flow-cytometry plots in Fig. 2k (see Fig. 1 below). All these errors occurred when selecting representative images or data from the large datasets acquired, processed and stored. We have retrieved the original raw data and corrected all the errors. However, for the data in Supplementary Fig. 12b (duplicated image portions between the H2DBP (–) and Hf-DBP groups), Supplementary Fig. 17 (duplicated image portions between the PBS (–) and H2DBP (+) groups and between the PBS (–) and Bi-DBP (–) groups) and Supplementary Fig. 22c (duplicated image portions between the PBS (–) and H2DBP (+) groups and between the H2DBP (+) and Bi-DBP (+) groups, for liver tissue), we were unable to find