The following errors appeared in the 15 August 2015 issue of the journal [Kelesidis T, Tran TTT, Stein, JH, et al. Changes in Inflammation and Immune Activation With Atazanavir-, Raltegravir-, Darunavir-Based Initial Antiviral Therapy: ACTG 5260s. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 61 (4):651–660. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ327].
In the RESULTS section under the heading “Changes in Markers of Macrophage and T-Cell Activation”, the second and third paragraphs currently read:
“sCD14 decreased to levels 10% lower than baseline with RAL at weeks 48 and 96, while changes with the PI/r regimens were not apparent. In contrast, sCD163 decreased to at least 40% lower than baseline levels at week 96 across all treatment groups. A sustained decrease in frequency of intermediate CD14+CD16+ monocytes was evident in the ATV/r and DRV/r groups; after 96 weeks, mean expression was 40% and 30% lower than baseline, respectively. Increased expression of nonclassical monocytes CD14(dim)CD16+ was apparent across treatment groups over time, although this change was modest in magnitude (Table 2, Figure 2).
In general, differences in changes in these markers over time between treatment groups were not apparent (Table 3). One exception included a greater decline in sCD14 with RAL compared with ATV/r or DRV/r, although this difference was less than 10% in magnitude. Additionally, a marked decline in expression of inflammatory CD14+CD16+ with ATV/r compared with RAL was apparent at week 48 and sustained at week 96”
They should correctly read:
“sCD14 decreased to levels 10% lower than baseline with RAL at weeks 48 and 96, while changes with the PI/r regimens were not apparent. In contrast, sCD163 decreased to at least 40% lower than baseline levels at week 96 across all treatment groups. A sustained decrease in frequency of intermediate CD14+CD16+ monocytes was evident in the ATV/r group; after 96 weeks, mean expression was 20% lower than baseline. Decreased expression of nonclassical monocytes CD14(dim)CD16+ was apparent across treatment groups over time, in the ATV/r and DRV/r groups, with the largest changes observed in the ATV/r group, mean expression was 50% and 35% lower than baseline, respectively (Table 2, Figure 2)
In general, differences in changes in these markers over time between treatment groups were not apparent (Table 3). Two exceptions included a greater decline in sCD14 with RAL compared with ATV/r or DRV/r, although this difference was less than 10% in magnitude and greater decline in expression of CD14(dim) CD16+ with ATV/r compared to RAL and DRV/r with difference in magnitude of 30–45% at week 24. Additionally, a marked decline in expression of inflammatory CD14+CD16+ with both ATV/r and DRV/r compared with RAL was apparent at week 24 and sustained at week 96 and at week 24 when comparing ATV/r with DRV/r.”
In the 6th paragraph of the DISCUSSION section, the sentence currently reads
“This pattern was different when compared with the effects of ART on markers of monocyte and T-cell activation, where there was marked durable suppression in levels over time.”
It should correctly read:
“This pattern was different when compared with the effects of ART on markers of monocyte and T-cell activation.”
In Table 1, the bottom two lines of the “Biomarkers (available measures)”, currently read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ (n = 212) | 62 (48–71) | 58 (46–65) | 62 (47–73) | 63 (54–72) |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ (n = 212) | 8 (6–13) | 10 (6–16) | 7 (4–13) | 8 (6–12) |
They should correctly read
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ (n = 212) | 0.8 (9.3-1.7) | 0.8 (.4-1.8) | 0.6 (0.2–1.7) | .9 (0.4–1.6) |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ (n = 212) | 10 (6–13) | 10 (7–15) | 10 (6–13) | 9 (6–12) |
In Table 2, the bottom 2 lines currently read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ | 58 | 1.06 (0.99, 1.14) | 61 | 1.08 (1.00, 1.18) | 65 |
1.15 (1.05, 1.25) |
70 |
1.09 (1.01, 1.17) |
73 | 1.05 (0.99, 1.12) | 71 | 1.08 (1.00, 1.17) |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ | 58 |
0.58 (0.46, 0.72) |
61 |
0.58 (0.47, 0.70) |
65 | 0.93 (0.71, 1.23) | 70 | 0.85 (0.66, 1.10) | 73 | 0.78 (0.61, 1.02) | 71 |
0.71 (0.54, 0.93) |
They should correctly read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ | 58 | 0.51 (0.37, 0.70) | 61 | 0.65 (0.49, 0.86) | 65 |
0.95 0.67, 1.25) |
70 |
0.99 (0.70, 1.42) |
73 | 0.74 (0.54, 1.00) | 71 | 0.73 (0.53, 1.01) |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ | 58 |
0.77 (0.64, 0.92) |
61 |
0.79 (0.67, 0.94) |
65 | 0.93 (0.77, 1.13) | 70 | 0.99 (0.84, 1.16) | 73 | 0.96 (0.82, 1.12) | 71 |
0.87 (0.72, 1.04) |
In Table 3, there are 3 sections to be corrected
a)In the ATV/r vs DRV/r section, the bottom 2 lines currently read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ | 1.01 (.91, 1.12) | .23 | .32 | 1.00 (.88, 1.14) | .32 | .76 |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ | 0.74 (.49, 1.10) | .08 | .31 | 0.82 (.55, 1.21) | .32 | .76 |
They should correctly read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ | 0.69 (0.42, 1.15) | 0.037 | 0.13 | 0.89 (0.54, 1.46) | 0.75 | 0.84 |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ | 0.80 (0.61, 1.05) | 0.024 | 0.13 | 0.92 (0.69, 1.22) | 0.59 | 0.84 |
b)In the ATV/r vs RAL section, the bottom 2 lines currently read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ | 0.93 (.81, 1.06) | .68 | .68 | 0.99 (.88, 1.13) | .48 | .77 |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ | 0.62 (.41, .94) | .011 | .09 | 0.68 (.46, .99) | .007 | .06 |
They should correctly read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ | 0.54 (0.31,0.93) | 0.004 | 0.029 | 0.66. (0.39, 1.11) | 0.07 | 0.28 |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ | 0.82 (0.61, 1.11) | .011 | 0.19 | 0.80 (.62, 1.05) | 0.06 | 0.28 |
c)In the DRV/r vs RAL section, the bottom 2 lines currently read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ | 0.92 (.81, 1.03) | .12 | .45 | 0.99 (.88, 1.12) | .68 | .93 |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ | 0.84 (.55, 1.30) | .25 | .50 | 0.83 (.54, 1.27) | .18 | .82 |
They should correctly read:
| %MNC: CD14(dim)CD16+ | 0.78 (0.46, 1.31) | 0.38 | 0.98 | 0.74 (.43, 1.26) | 0.19 | 0.61 |
| %MNC: CD14+CD16+ | 1.03 (0.78, 1.35) | 0.52 | 0.98 | 0.88 (0.67, 1.16) | 0.27 | 0.61 |
Lastly, the correct version of Figure 2 is as follows:
The author regrets these errors.
