TY - JOUR
T1 - Erratum
T2 - EGFR-Induced and PKCε Monoubiquitylation-Dependent NF-κB Activation Upregulates PKM2 Expression and Promotes Tumorigenesis (Molecular Cell (2012) 48(5) (771–784)(S1097276512008283)(10.1016/j.molcel.2012.09.028))
AU - Yang, Weiwei
AU - Xia, Yan
AU - Cao, Yu
AU - Zheng, Yanhua
AU - Bu, Wen
AU - Zhang, Lin
AU - You, M. James
AU - Koh, Mei Yee
AU - Cote, Gilbert
AU - Aldape, Kenneth D
AU - Li, Yi
AU - Verma, Inder M.
AU - Chiao, Paul J.
AU - Lu, Zhimin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/1/18
Y1 - 2018/1/18
N2 - (Molecular Cell 48, 771–784; December 14, 2012) For Figure 7B, we used non-integral numbers to determine the intensities of the IHC staining of the patient tissues. However, our original method description does not clearly reflect the score system we used and should have been described as follows. We assigned the following proportion scores: 0 if 0% of the tumor cells showed positive staining, 0.1–1.0 if 0.1%–1% of cells were stained, 1.1–2.0 if 1.1%–10% stained, 2.1–3.0 if 11%–30% stained, 3.1–4.0 if 31%–70% stained, and 4.1–5.0 if 71%–100% stained (each percentage range of the stained tumor section is further divided into ten smaller percentage ranges and represented by corresponding non-integral scores, such as 3.1 representing 31%–34%). We rated the intensity of staining on a scale from 0 to 3: 0, negative; 1, weak; 2, moderate; and 3, strong. We then combined the proportion and intensity scores to obtain a total score (range, 0–8), as described previously (Allred et al., 1998). We sincerely apologize for any confusion that may be caused by the original inaccurate description.
AB - (Molecular Cell 48, 771–784; December 14, 2012) For Figure 7B, we used non-integral numbers to determine the intensities of the IHC staining of the patient tissues. However, our original method description does not clearly reflect the score system we used and should have been described as follows. We assigned the following proportion scores: 0 if 0% of the tumor cells showed positive staining, 0.1–1.0 if 0.1%–1% of cells were stained, 1.1–2.0 if 1.1%–10% stained, 2.1–3.0 if 11%–30% stained, 3.1–4.0 if 31%–70% stained, and 4.1–5.0 if 71%–100% stained (each percentage range of the stained tumor section is further divided into ten smaller percentage ranges and represented by corresponding non-integral scores, such as 3.1 representing 31%–34%). We rated the intensity of staining on a scale from 0 to 3: 0, negative; 1, weak; 2, moderate; and 3, strong. We then combined the proportion and intensity scores to obtain a total score (range, 0–8), as described previously (Allred et al., 1998). We sincerely apologize for any confusion that may be caused by the original inaccurate description.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041321812&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041321812&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.12.034
DO - 10.1016/j.molcel.2017.12.034
M3 - Comment/debate
C2 - 29351852
AN - SCOPUS:85041321812
SN - 1097-2765
VL - 69
SP - 347
JO - Molecular cell
JF - Molecular cell
IS - 2
ER -