Erratum Regarding Previously Published Articles

    Open AccessPublished:November 12, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iotech.2021.100051
        The Publisher would like to point out that the papers listed below were mistakenly published with missing information. This information has now been gathered and included below.
        The Publisher apologises for this oversight.
        Erratum to ‘Integrated functional and spatial profiling of tumor immune responses induced by immunotherapy: the iPROFILER platform.’
        Volume 10, June 2021, 100034
        The Publisher would like to point out that the paper listed below was mistakenly published without the full ethics statement published in the main body of the paper, rather the statement was presented in the supplementary material.
        The appropriate ethics statement, provided by the authors in the supplementary material, is now included below.
        Tumour samples were collected from nine cancer patients undergoing surgery for lung cancer or ovarian cancer between July 2014 and June 2016 at the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland. A detailed overview of the patient characteristics is provided in Table S1 (see online supplementary material). The study was approved by the local ethical review board (Ethikkommission Nordwestschweiz; EKNZ 321/10) and performed in compliance with all relevant ethical regulations. All patients consented in writing to the analysis of their tumour samples.
        The Publisher would like to point out that the paper listed below was also mistakenly published without a peer review statement. The Publisher apologises for this oversight. The appropriate peer review statement is now included below.
        Given their role as Associate Editor Daniela Thommen had no involvement in the peer review of this article and has no access to information regarding its peer review. Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to John Haanen, Editor in Chief of the Journal.
        Erratum to ‘Molecular Imaging for Cancer Immunotherapy.’
        Volume 5, March 2020, Pages 10-21
        The Publisher would like to point out that the paper listed below was mistakenly published without a peer review statement. The Publisher apologises for this oversight. The appropriate peer review statement is now included below.
        Given their role as Editorial Board member, Charles G Drake had no involvement in the peer review of this article and has no access to information regarding its peer review. Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to John Haanen, Editor in Chief of the Journal.
        Erratum to ‘Tumour mutational burden: primary versus metastatic tissue creates systematic bias.’
        Volume 4, December 2019, Pages 8-14
        The Publisher would like to point out that the paper listed below was mistakenly published without a peer review statement. The Publisher apologises for this oversight. The appropriate peer review statement is now included below.
        Given their role as Associate Editor, Samra Turajlic had no involvement in the peer review of this article and has no access to information regarding its peer review. Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to John Haanen, Editor in Chief of the Journal.
        Erratum to ‘T cell receptor cross-recognition and strategies to select safe TCRs for clinical translation.’
        Volume 2, September 2019, Pages 1-10
        The Publisher would like to point out that the paper listed below was mistakenly published without a peer review statement. The Publisher apologises for this oversight. The appropriate peer review statement is now included below.
        Given their role as Associate Editor, Sine Reker Hadrup had no involvement in the peer review of this article and has no access to information regarding its peer review. Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to John Haanen, Editor in Chief of the Journal.
        Erratum to ‘Gene editing: towards the third generation of adoptive T-cell transfer therapies.’
        Volume 1, July 2019, Pages 19-26
        The Publisher would like to point out that the paper listed below was mistakenly published without a peer review statement. The Publisher apologises for this oversight. The appropriate peer review statement is now included below.
        Given their role as Editorial Board member, Antonio Ribas had no involvement in the peer review of this article and has no access to information regarding its peer review. Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to John Haanen, Editor in Chief of the Journal.

        Linked Article

        • Tumour mutational burden: primary versus metastatic tissue creates systematic bias
          Immuno-Oncology TechnologyVol. 4
          • Preview
            Tumour mutational burden (TMB) has emerged as a reproducible biomarker to predict immunotherapy response across multiple cancer types. However, a key aspect of TMB measurement that is often overlooked is the source of tissue sample used, which creates a potential for systematic bias. The predominant source is either primary or metastatic tumour tissue. Primary tumours are more heterogeneous and reflect a longer period of tumour evolution, whereas metastases tend to have a more monoclonal structure and potentially different TMB scores.
          • Full-Text
          • PDF
          Open Access
        • Integrated functional and spatial profiling of tumour immune responses induced by immunotherapy: the iPROFILER platform
          Immuno-Oncology and TechnologyVol. 10
          • Preview
            Cancer immunotherapy elicits functional activation and changes in immune cell distribution in cancer. Tumour heterogeneity is a reason for treatment failure but is difficult to capture in experimental settings. This proof-of-principle study describes the integrated functional and digital spatial profiling platform iPROFILER to capture in-situ immune activation patterns with high precision.
          • Full-Text
          • PDF
          Open Access
        • Molecular imaging for cancer immunotherapy
          Immuno-Oncology TechnologyVol. 5
          • Preview
            Immunotherapy has changed the treatment landscape for many cancers; however, not all patients treated have a favorable response and others can develop immune-related adverse events. A method to predict the treatment response to immunotherapeutic agents could allow for improved selection of patients more likely to benefit from treatment while sparing those who would suffer serious complications. While this has been an active area of research and has resulted in significant insights, current proposed mechanisms do not fully explain responses to therapy.
          • Full-Text
          • PDF
          Open Access
        • Gene editing: Towards the third generation of adoptive T-cell transfer therapies
          Immuno-Oncology TechnologyVol. 1
          • Preview
            - Gene editing with CRISPR-Cas9 allows generating tumor specific T cells for adoptive T cell transfer (ACT). - Gene editing allows generating off-the-shelf ACT products. - Gene editing can tailor T cell phenotype and increase antitumor potency. - Non-viral gene editing is a requirement for personalized ACT. - Personalized 3rd generation ACT: Gene-edited neoantigen specific T cells.
          • Full-Text
          • PDF
          Open Access
        • T-cell-receptor cross-recognition and strategies to select safe T-cell receptors for clinical translation
          Immuno-Oncology TechnologyVol. 2
          • Preview
            T cell receptor (TCR) degeneracy plays a fundamental role for our immune systems capacity to recognize foreign antigens, but it provides an inherent risk in TCR-gene transfer cell therapies, in terms of TCR mediated cross-recognition to irrelevant antigens. Recent advances in description of T cell receptor cross recognition can guide the selection process for TCRs into clinical use.
          • Full-Text
          • PDF
          Open Access