Tanveer Ahmad, Waseem Ashraf, Abdulkhaleg Ibrahim, Liliyana Zaayter, Christian D Muller, Ali Hamiche, Yves Mély, Christian Bronner, Marc Mousli
{"title":"[Corrigendum] TIP60 governs the auto‑ubiquitination of UHRF1 through USP7 dissociation from the UHRF1/USP7 complex.","authors":"Tanveer Ahmad, Waseem Ashraf, Abdulkhaleg Ibrahim, Liliyana Zaayter, Christian D Muller, Ali Hamiche, Yves Mély, Christian Bronner, Marc Mousli","doi":"10.3892/ijo.2026.5938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Following the publication of the above article, and an Expression of Concern statement (doi: 10.3892/ijo.2026.5908) that was published in light of the fact that the GAPDH control western blots shown in Fig. 5A on p. 9 were strikingly similar to the GAPDH control western blots shown in Fig. 5D, the authors have responded to the queries raised by the Editorial Office. The GAPDH panels shown in Figs. 5A and 5D were generated from the same experiment and the same set of protein lysates: Fig. 5A presented the analysis of total protein expression, whereas Fig. 5D presented immunoprecipitation analyses performed using material derived from these same experimental samples. Consequently, the GAPDH loading control was legitimately shared between the two figures. However, given that the original figure legend did not explicitly state that the same GAPDH loading control was used for both analyses, to eliminate any possible ambiguity for readers, the authors have revised Fig. 5 by replacing the representative '-MG132 panel' in Fig. 5A with results obtained from an independent repeat experiment performed under identical experimental conditions. The revised version of Fig. 5 is shown on the next page. Note that this revised figure reproduces the original findings, and does not affect the quantitative analyses, the interpretation of the data, or the conclusions of the study. Regarding a query raised by the Editorial Office concerning the presentation of flow cytometric plots in Fig. 8, the authors explained that Fig. 8E was generated by applying an additional fluorescence gate to the parent flow cytometry dataset shown in Fig. 8B, which represents standard flow cytometric analysis, rather than duplication of experimental data, and so this figure was presented correctly, and as intended by the authors. The authors thank the Editor of <i>International Journal of Oncology</i> for granting them the opportunity to publish this corrigendum, and all the authors agree with its publication. [International Journal of Oncology 59: 89, 2021; DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2021.5269].</p>","PeriodicalId":14175,"journal":{"name":"International journal of oncology","volume":"69 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2026.5938","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/9/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Following the publication of the above article, and an Expression of Concern statement (doi: 10.3892/ijo.2026.5908) that was published in light of the fact that the GAPDH control western blots shown in Fig. 5A on p. 9 were strikingly similar to the GAPDH control western blots shown in Fig. 5D, the authors have responded to the queries raised by the Editorial Office. The GAPDH panels shown in Figs. 5A and 5D were generated from the same experiment and the same set of protein lysates: Fig. 5A presented the analysis of total protein expression, whereas Fig. 5D presented immunoprecipitation analyses performed using material derived from these same experimental samples. Consequently, the GAPDH loading control was legitimately shared between the two figures. However, given that the original figure legend did not explicitly state that the same GAPDH loading control was used for both analyses, to eliminate any possible ambiguity for readers, the authors have revised Fig. 5 by replacing the representative '-MG132 panel' in Fig. 5A with results obtained from an independent repeat experiment performed under identical experimental conditions. The revised version of Fig. 5 is shown on the next page. Note that this revised figure reproduces the original findings, and does not affect the quantitative analyses, the interpretation of the data, or the conclusions of the study. Regarding a query raised by the Editorial Office concerning the presentation of flow cytometric plots in Fig. 8, the authors explained that Fig. 8E was generated by applying an additional fluorescence gate to the parent flow cytometry dataset shown in Fig. 8B, which represents standard flow cytometric analysis, rather than duplication of experimental data, and so this figure was presented correctly, and as intended by the authors. The authors thank the Editor of International Journal of Oncology for granting them the opportunity to publish this corrigendum, and all the authors agree with its publication. [International Journal of Oncology 59: 89, 2021; DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2021.5269].
期刊介绍:
The main aim of Spandidos Publications is to facilitate scientific communication in a clear, concise and objective manner, while striving to provide prompt publication of original works of high quality.
The journals largely concentrate on molecular and experimental medicine, oncology, clinical and experimental cancer treatment and biomedical research.
All journals published by Spandidos Publications Ltd. maintain the highest standards of quality, and the members of their Editorial Boards are world-renowned scientists.