Correction.

MEDICAL SCIENCES Correction for “Genomic responses in mouse models greatly mimic human inflammatory diseases,” by Keizo Takao and Tsuyoshi Miyakawa, which appeared in issue 4, January 27, 2015, of Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (112:1167–1172; first published August 8, 2014; 10.1073/pnas.1401965111). The authors note the following corrections: Fig. 1 and its corresponding legend appeared incorrectly because genes were inappropriately included for the analyses for two reasons. First, some genes from the Human Burn and Human Trauma dataset were inappropriately included due to data handling errors. Second, the data originally presented in Fig. 1 included all genes with an absolute fold change (FC) greater than 1.2 for both human and mouse conditions. However, the genes with jFCj > 2.0 in human conditions and jFCj > 1.2 in mouse conditions should have been used, as in Fig. 3. Genes that meet the same criteria are appropriately analyzed, and corrected data are now presented in Fig. 1. As a result of this change, on page 1167, left column, in the Abstract, lines 10–12, “Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient: 0.43–0.68; genes changed in the same direction: 77–93%; P = 6.5 × 10 to 1.2 × 10)” should instead appear as “Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient: 0.48–0.68 in Fig. 1; significance of overlap: P = 6.5 × 10 to 1.2 × 10 in Fig. 2; genes changed in the same direction: 59.5–93.2% in Fig. 3.” Also as a result of this, the third paragraph on the left column of page 1168, starting with “We conducted a KolmogorovSmirnov test” should instead appear as: “We conducted a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test to check for the normality of the distribution of gene expression data in human burn conditions, which were compared with mouse models as a reference dataset. The assumption of normality was rejected either for the fold changes or for the log-twofold changes of the gene expression levels (P < 0.0001). Therefore, we mainly used nonparametric Spearman’s correlation coefficient (ρ) for the correlation analyses. The criteria for the selection of the genes of interest was absolute fold change >2.0 in human diseases and >1.2 in mouse conditions, and P < 0.05 in both conditions. The correlations of the gene changes as assessed by Spearman’s correlation coefficient indicated that there were highly significant similarities in gene responses between each of the human conditions and those of the mouse models (Fig. 1; ρ = 0.48–0.68, P < 0.0001 for every comparison between human conditions and the corresponding mouse models). There were also highly significant correlations among different mouse models (Fig. 1; ρ = 0.23–0.84, P < 0.0001 for every comparison between a pair of mouse models).” Also as a result of this, on page 1171, right column, in the third full paragraph, lines 5 and 6 “In Fig. 1, genes meeting the criteria of P < 0.05 and fold change >1.2 are plotted in the graph” should instead appear as “In Fig. 1, genes meeting the criteria of absolute fold change >2.0 in human diseases and >1.2 in mouse models, and P < 0.05 in both conditions, are plotted in the graph.” Fig. 2 also appeared incorrectly due to a copy and paste error. In addition, on page 1172, left column, first paragraph, lines 3 and 4, “genes with a P value of 0.05 of less and an absolute fold change of 1.2 or greater were used” should instead appear as “genes with a P value < 0.05 and an absolute fold change >1.2 were used.” Fig. 3 also appeared incorrectly due to a few errors in gene selection and in typing. As a result on page 1168, right column, second full paragraph, lines 9–11, “Fig. 3; human: fold change >2.0; mouse model: fold change >1.2; R = 0.26–0.51; P < 0.0001 for all comparisons; percentage: 48.1–86.2” should instead appear as “Fig. 3; human: absolute fold change >2.0; mouse model: absolute fold change >1.2; R = 0.26–0.57; P < 0.0001 for all comparisons; percentage: 59.5–86.2.” Additionally, on page 1172, left column, first paragraph, lines 7 and 9, “P value of 0.05 or less” should instead appear as “P value < 0.05.” Also as a result of this, Table S2 appeared incorrectly. Please see separate SI Correction. Fig. 4 also appeared incorrectly due to data input error. As a result, the paragraph on pages 1169–1170 starting with “Some of the pathways/biogroups with high overlap are shown” should instead appear as: “Some of the pathways/biogroups with high overlap are shown in Fig. 4 A–D. The significance of the overlap between each condition and pathways/biogroups is also shown in the zgraph. There was significant overlap between genes annotated in GO as ‘innate immune response’ and the genes up-regulated in the mouse models of burn (Fig. 4A, P = 6.7 × 10), sepsis (P = 4.6 × 10), and infection (P = 1.3 × 10), as well as in human burn (P = 4.8 × 10), trauma (P = 4.1 × 10), and sepsis conditions (P = 6.3 × 10). Significant overlap was also detected between ‘genes involved in cytokine signaling in immune system (canonical pathways, Broad MSigDB)’ and genes up-regulated in the mouse models of sepsis (Fig. 4B, P = 4.0 × 10), burn (P = 1.6 × 10), and infection (P = 1.3 × 10), as well as in human burn (P = 1.6 × 10), trauma (P = 6.5 × 10), and sepsis conditions (P = 3.2 × 10). With regard to down-regulated pathways/biogroups, genes annotated ‘lymphocyte differentiation (GO)’ significantly overlapped with genes downregulated in the mouse models of burn (Fig. 4C, P = 2.2 × 10), trauma (P = 1.4 × 10), sepsis (P = 4.2 × 10), and infection (P = 1.3 × 10), as well as in human burn (P = 1.7 × 10), trauma (P = 5.6 × 10), and sepsis conditions (P = 3.5 × 10). There was also significant overlap between ‘genes involved in Translocation of ZAP-70 to immunological synapse (canonical pathways, Broad MSigDB)’ and genes down-regulated in all of the human disease conditions and mouse models of these conditions (Fig. 4D, human burn, P = 1.3 × 10; human trauma, P = 0.0003; human sepsis, P = 8.7 × 10; mouse burn, P = 0.0003; mouse trauma, P = 5.1 × 10; mouse sepsis, P = 1.3 × 10; and mouse infection, P = 1.8 × 10).” Lastly, a portion of the Materials and Methods appeared incorrectly. The paragraph on the right column of page 1171 starting with “The datasets that we analyzed in the present study” should instead appear as: “The datasets that we analyzed in the present study were the same as those used in the study by Seok et al. (1) and are registered in NextBio. In Fig. 1, the following datasets were used for gene expression pattern analyses: ‘leukocytes of patients with severe burns on >20% of total body surface area vs. healthy controls’ from GSE37069 is referred to as ‘Human Burn’; ‘white blood cells of severe blunt trauma patients 28 d after injury vs. healthy subjects’ from GSE36809 is referred to as ‘Human Trauma’; ‘whole blood of sepsis patients with community-acquired