Hao DL, Xie R, De GJ, et al. Int J Nanomed. 2020;15:1771–1786.
The authors have advised due to an error that occurred inadvertently at the time of figure assembly, the images of the cellular uptake of free C6 and ART-M1-C6 are incorrect for Figure 1 on page 1780.
Figure 1.
Cellular uptake of free C6 and micelles incorporated C6. (A) Confocal FL images of cellular internalized C6, PBAE-ART4-C6 and PBAE-ART2-C6, after 3 h incubation with CT-26 cells. Blue FL represents DAPI, green FL represents C6. (B) Flow cytometry analysis of mean FL intensity (n=10,000 cells) in CT-26 cells incubated with C6, PBAE-ART4-C6 and PBAE-ART2-C6 for 0.5 h and 3 h, respectively. Data are presented as the mean of three measurements ± SD. *P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001.
The correct Figure 1 is shown below.
The authors have also advised on page 1779, Cytotoxicity Assay and Cellular Apoptosis Analysis section, second paragraph, the text “The apoptosis rates for cells treated with free ART, PBAE-ART4 and PBAE-ART2 for 24 h were 8.76%, 11.88% and 14.27%, respectively. After incubation for 72 h, the apoptosis rates were increased to 18.41%, 22.49% and 26.85%, respectively, with stronger apoptosis rates were observed in the micelles groups than that of free drug (Figure 2)” should read “The apoptosis rates for cells treated with free ART, PBAE-ART4 and PBAE-ART2 for 24 h were 8.73%, 11.84% and 14.23%, respectively. After incubation for 72 h, the apoptosis rates were increased to 18.35%, 22.42% and 26.76%, respectively, with stronger apoptosis rates were observed in the micelles groups than that of free drug (Figure 2).”
The authors also advised that there is an error in Figure S2 of the supplementary material, the images of the CMC of PEOz-PLA-PBAE-2 and PEOz-PLA-PBAE-3 should be interchanged.
The correct Figure S2 is shown below.
The authors apologize for these errors and advise they do not affect the results and conclusions of the paper.
Figure S2.
The CMC values of the PEOz-PLA-PBAEs copolymer micelles.