Corrigendum: A pharmacogenetically-guided acenocoumarol dosing algorithm for Chilean patients: a discovery cohort study
Angela Roco, Elena Nieto, Marcelo Suárez, Mario Rojo, Maria Paz Bertoglia, Gabriel Verón, Francisca Tamayo, Annabella Arredondo, Daniela Cruz, Jessica Muñoz, Gabriela Bravo, Patricio Salas, Fanny Mejías, Gerald Godoy, Paulo Véliz, Luis Abel Quiñones
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsScience, Research, and Medicine
In the published article, there was an error in Figure 1 as published. The patient numbers are listed as 377 --> 377 --> 304, but it should say 377 --> 305 --> 304. The corrected Figure 1 and its caption appear below.
In the published article, there was an error in Results, Algorithm for Acenocoumarol Dosing in the Chilean Population. In the formula two factors have decimals placed incorrectly. It’s a formatting error, but it is significant as it impacts the dose calculations.
The formula previously stated:
“Log WTD = 3.081 + (0.167 × men) - (age × 0.081) - (initial INR × 0.55) + (BMI × 0.013) - (CYP2C9*1/2 × 0.107) - (CYP2C91/3 × 0.323) - (CYP2C93/*3 × 0.746) - (VKORC1 G/A × 0.270) - (VKORC1 A/A × 0.701).”
The corrected formula appears below:
“Log WTD = 3.081 + (0.167 × men) - (age × 0.0081) - (initial INR × 0.055) + (BMI × 0.013) - (CYP2C9*1/2 × 0.107) - (CYP2C91/3 × 0.323) - (CYP2C93/*3 × 0.746) - (VKORC1 G/A × 0.270) - (VKORC1 A/A × 0.701).”
In the published article, there was an error in Results, Genotype Distribution in the Study Population, paragraph 1.
This sentence previously stated:
“The analysis of the HWE showed that only CYP2C93 (rs1057910) is in HWE (chi2 = 4.67). All other SNPs, VKORC1 (rs9923231) (chi2 = 0.09), VKORC1 (rs7294) (chi2 = 0.62), GGCx (rs11676382) (chi2 = 1.2), CYP4F2 (rs2108622) (chi2 = 1.02), ApoE (rs429358) (chi2 = 0.08), ABCB1 (rs1045642) (chi2 = 0.68), and CYP2C92 (rs1799853) (chi2 = 2.33), are not in HWE.”
The corrected sentence appears below:
“The analysis of the HWE showed that only CYP2C9*3 (rs1057910) is not in HWE (chi2 = 4.67). All other SNPs, VKORC1(rs9923231) (chi2 = 0.09), VKORC1 (rs7294) (chi2 = 0.62), GGCx (rs11676382) (chi2 = 1.2), CYP4F2 (rs2108622) (chi2 = 1.02), ApoE (rs429358) (chi2 = 0.08), ABCB1 (rs1045642) (chi2 = 0.68), and *CYP2C9**2 (rs1799853) (chi2 = 2.33), are in HWE.”
The correspondence email for author Luis Abel Quiñones has been updated in the published article to [email protected].
The authors apologize for these errors and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.