Correction to: High expression of autophagy-related gene EIF4EBP1 could promote tamoxifen resistance and predict poor prognosis in breast cancer

Abstract

This is an erratum to the published paper titled, “High expression of autophagy-related gene EIF4EBP1 could promote tamoxifen resistance and predict poor prognosis in breast cancer.” We have removed the citations to certain articles in subsequent revisions of the manuscript. However, owing to our oversight, the citation marker in the upper right corner was not removed. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

Key Words: World Journal of Clinical Cases; Correction

Core Tip: This manuscript serves to correct the references in the article titled “High expression of autophagy-related gene EIF4EBP1 could promote tamoxifen resistance and predict poor prognosis in breast cancer. World J Clin Cases 2023; 11(20): 4788-4799 PMID: 37583983 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i20.4788”.

TO THE EDITOR

We found a mistake in High expression of autophagy-related gene EIF4EBP1 could promote tamoxifen resistance and predict poor prognosis in breast cancer[1]. This is an unintentional error that occurred when sorting through the images.

In the article[1], the Materials and Methods section includes the following:

“Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis (GEPIA, http://gepia.cancer-pku.cn/) is a web-based tool used to conduct patient survival analysis based on The Cancer Genome Atlas database[19]. Kaplan-Meier plotter (https://kmplot.com/analysis/) is another web-based tool that can be used to conduct patient survival analysis using data from the Gene Expression Omnibus, European Genome-phenome Archive, and The Cancer Genome Atlas databases[20]. In this study, survival outcomes were compared between high- and low-EIF4EBP1 expression groups based on GEPIA and Kaplan-Meier plotter. The cutoff criterion was P < 0.05. GSEA was employed as a powerful method to explore biological insights and potential pathways associated with a gene list by identifying genes within previously identified gene sets[21]”.

For Reference 19 in the Methods section, the correct citation should be: Tang Z, Li C, Kang B, Gao G, Li C, Zhang Z. GEPIA: A web server for cancer and normal gene expression profiling and interactive analyses. Nucleic Acids Res 2017; 45: W98-W102 PMID: 28407145 DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx247. We removed the citation of this article in subsequent revisions of the manuscript. However, owing to our oversight, the citation marker in the upper right corner was not removed. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

For Reference 20 in the Methods section, the correct citation should be: Győrffy B. Survival analysis across the entire transcriptome identifies biomarkers with the highest prognostic power in breast cancer. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 2021; 19: 4101-4109 PMID: 34527184 DOI: 10.1016/j.csbj.2021.07.014. We removed the citation of this article in subsequent revisions of the manuscript. However, owing to our oversight, the citation marker in the upper right corner was not removed. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

For Reference 21 in the Methods section, the correct citation should be: Subramanian A, Tamayo P, Mootha VK, Mukherjee S, Ebert BL, Gillette MA, Paulovich A, Pomeroy SL, Golub TR, Lander ES, Mesirov JP. Gene set enrichment analysis: A knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005; 102: 15545-15550 PMID: 16199517 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0506580102. We removed the citation of this article in subsequent revisions of the manuscript. However, owing to our oversight, the citation marker in the upper right corner was not removed. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

In the Introduction section, in the sentence, “An estimated 3.9 million women have been diagnosed with BC in the past 5 years, and more than 350000 annual deaths worldwide are attributed to BC[1,2],” Reference 2 was incorrectly cited as: Zwirner J, Ondruschka B, Scholze M, Schulze-Tanzil G, Hammer N. Mechanical and morphological description of human acellular dura mater as a scaffold for surgical reconstruction. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2019; 96: 38-44 [PMID: 31029993 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.04.035].

The correct citation, based on our initial manuscript, should be: Harbeck N, Penault-Llorca F, Cortes J, Gnant M, Houssami N, Poortmans P, Ruddy K, Tsang J, Cardoso F. Breast cancer. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2019; 5: 66 PMID: 31548545 DOI: 10.1038/s41572-019-0111-2.

This error occurred owing to our oversight and the improper use of reference management software, which inadvertently included references from unrelated studies in our research. Unfortunately, this error was not caught during the final revision process. We sincerely apologize for this mistake and any confusion it may have caused.

In the Discussion section, in the sentence, “TAM is a nonsteroidal antiestrogen drug and has historically been the most widely used antiestrogen drug for the treatment of ER-positive BC patients[19,20],” Reference 20 was incorrectly cited as Höner Zu Siederdissen C, Maasoumy B, Marra F, Deterding K, Port K, Manns MP, Cornberg M, Back D, Wedemeyer H. Drug-Drug Interactions With Novel All Oral Interferon-Free Antiviral Agents in a Large Real-World Cohort. Clin Infect Dis 2016; 62: 561-567 [PMID: 26611779 DOI: 10.1093/cid/civ973].

The correct citation should be: Haque R, Shi J, Schottinger JE, Ahmed SA, Cheetham TC, Chung J, Avila C, Kleinman K, Habel LA, Fletcher SW, Kwan ML. Tamoxifen and Antidepressant Drug Interaction in a Cohort of 16,887 Breast Cancer Survivors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2016; 108: 3 [PMID: 26631176 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv337]. This error was caused by the improper use of reference management software, which mistakenly inserted references from other studies into our manuscript. We apologize for any confusion or inconvenience caused by this mistake.