The purpose of this note is to correct both the analysis and typographical errors.
The typos are as follows. The abstract, line 6: In “in 6 patients (8%)” should read “in 5 patients (6%)”. Page 4, line 12: In “8% (6) of the samples, being 5 missens” should read “6% (5) of the samples, being 4 missense”. Page 4, line 19: In “Of the 6 cases” should read “Of the 5 cases”. Page 4, line 20: In “(5, or 83.3%)” should read “(4, or 80%)”. Page 4, second column, line 8: In “OS for patients with wild DNMT3A gene was 41.4% and for patients with mutated DNMT3A was 44.4% ()” should read “OS for patients with wild DNMT3A gene was 45.7% and for patients with mutated DNMT3A was 60.0% ()”. Page 6, line 4: In “found in 8%” should read “found in 6%”. Page 6, second column, line 13: In “3 of 6 mutations” should read “3 of 5 mutations”. Page 6, second column, line 16: In “Five, or 80%,” should read “Four, or 80%,”. Page 6, second column, line 18: In “()” should read “()”. Page 6, second column, line 20: In “(20.7 × 109/L)” should read “(15.6 × 109/L)”. Table 4, column 2, line 6: In “H896*” should read “P896*”. Table 4: Entire line 7 was excluded. Table 5, line 2: In “40.2, 44.8 and 0.56” should read “47.4, 40.4 and 0.42”. Table 5, line 4: In “50% (3), 59.3% (45) and 0.68” should read “60% (3), 57.9% (44) and 0.92”. Table 5, line 5: In “50% (3), 40.7% (31)” should read “40% (2), 42.1% (32)”. Table 5, line 19: In “50% (3), 51.4% (37) and 1.000” should read “40% (2), 52.7% (39) and 0.66”. Table 5, line 20: In “50% (2), 30.9% (17) and 0.58” should read “40% (2), 29.2% (21) and 0.63”. We changed Figure 3 as shown above.