BGPT: Paper Review: Correction: Macrocyclic peptides as inhibitors of WDR5

Explore by Goal

Quick Explanation Copied

Core correction

In the Correction: Macrocyclic peptides as inhibitors of WDR5–lncRNA interactions, the authors report that the Kd values in Table 1 (entries 14 and 15) were mis-stated in the original article, and give corrected values of 0.53 ± 0.06 mM (entry 14) and 9.87 ± 4.78 mM (entry 15). They also add the missing acknowledgements and state these fixes do not change the paper’s conclusions.

Source:

Long Explanation

Paper Review (Correction Notice)

Target paper: Correction: Macrocyclic peptides as inhibitors of WDR5–lncRNA interactions

DOI: 10.1039/d5cc90059j • Published: 17 Feb 2025

What this document contains (from the correction itself):

Corrected Kd values for Table 1, entries 14 and 15 (column 3).
Added a missing acknowledgements section.
States the corrections do not affect the conclusions.

1) Corrected quantitative point (Table 1: entries 14 & 15)

The correction specifies the corrected Kd values (with uncertainties) for entries 14 and 15 in column 3 of Table 1:

Entry 14: Kd = 0.53 ± 0.06 mM
Entry 15: Kd = 9.87 ± 4.78 mM

Table entry	Corrected Kd (mM)	Interpretation note (skeptical)
14	0.53 ± 0.06	A ~0.47–0.59 mM range; exact assay context is not provided in the correction.
15	9.87 ± 4.78	Very broad uncertainty; correction confirms the magnitude but the underlying assay/fit details aren’t in this notice.

2) Visualizing the two corrected Kd values

Data source: correction notice Kd values for Table 1 entries 14 & 15.

3) Missing acknowledgements (what was added)

The correction states the acknowledgements section was omitted at publication time and then provides it in full, including:

Thanks to Christiane Heitbrink (TU Dortmund) for measuring HRMS data.
European Synchrotron Radiation Facility provision of synchrotron radiation facilities and thanks to P. Carpentier for assistance at beamline ID30A-3.
Funding: Ministry of Education (Taiwan) Government Scholarship for overseas study for Jen-Yao Chang; Open Access funding provided by the Max Planck Society.

4) Relationship to the original research article (context + what we can/can’t infer)

The correction is explicitly tied to the original article: Macrocyclic peptides as inhibitors of WDR5–lncRNA interactions (Chemical Communications; DOI 10.1039/d3cc03221c).

What the correction does NOT provide (key blind spot)

No re-description of how the Kd values were measured (methods/assay conditions) is included in the correction notice; it directs readers to the original article for experimental details.
The correction states the errors do not affect the conclusions, but this notice does not empirically re-check downstream functional data; readers would need the original paper’s full data context.

5) Mechanistic relevance (only what we can support)

The correction itself is narrow (Kd numbers + acknowledgements). However, the underlying original work (as provided in your extracted dataset) concerns macrocyclic peptides inhibiting WDR5–lncRNA interactions, including WDR5 binding to lncRNAs via a WBM-related interface, supported by in vitro binding and structural/cellular measurements in that original article.

Skeptical assessment of evidentiary implications

Direct implication: A numeric correction signals that at least two Kd table entries previously reported were wrong; any interpretation that depends sensitively on those specific magnitudes (e.g., ranking of variant potency) needs re-evaluation using the updated Table 1.
Uncertainty: Without the updated Table 1 content (other entries) and without assay-method details in the correction notice, we cannot judge how much the overall potency narrative shifts beyond these two rows.

6) One-click follow-ups on BGPT

Author reviews (bespoke BGPT links)

Feedback:

Updated: April 27, 2026