Correction to: J Transl Med (2019) 17:245 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-019-1987-z

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported errors in Figures 2, 3 and Figure 3 ‘continued’.

  1. 1.

    In Figure 2b and 2f of PDX2 model, duplicated pictures of tumors have been used.

  2. 2.

    In Figure 3 of H&E staining of PDX-004, duplicated pictures have been used. Moreover, the description of the second PDX-001 was not correct in Figure 3.

  3. 3.

    In Figure 3 ‘continued’ of H&E staining, duplicated pictures have been used in all PDX groups. Moreover, the part labels in Figure 3 ‘continued’ were not correct.

In this Correction the corrected version of Figs. 2, 3 and Fig. 3 ‘continued’ are shown.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Sensitivity of PDX models containing CDK4 aberrations to CDK4/6 inhibitors in vivo. When the tumor size reached approximately 600 mm3, mice (n = 4 per group) were treated with buffer control or inhibitors daily. Tumor volume was evaluated as % of the tumor volume on day 0 and presented as mean ± SD. The comparison of the growth curves was done with the repeated measure variance analysis. ns no significances; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3figure 3

Proliferation index of mucosal melanoma cells from PDX models containing CDK4 aberrations after CDK4/6 inhibitors treatments. On day 14 of treatments, the tumor nodules were excised and examined by H&E staining and immunohistochemical staining (for Ki-67). The sections were evaluated under microscope, and typical staining was photographed (a). The Ki-67 + cells under 5 random fields were counted. Bar = 20 μm. The results of Ki-67 + cells (b–f) were presented as mean ± SD of three sections. ns no significances; *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001

Full size image