Secondly, because of the choice of PRCC analysis as the core method of sensitivity analysis, our current GSA implementation presumes monotonicity of relationship between model parameters and analysed network outputs. Therefore, prior to analysis, the tests should be made, whether such an assumption can be justified (e.g. via visual evaluation of relevant scatterplots). If the monotonicity of input–output relationship cannot be assumed, the GSA procedure would require further adjustments, including replacement of PRCC analysis with a more appropriate method of SA (e.g. MPSA). GL conceived the idea of the study,

contributed to GSA design and coordination of the study, ran simulations, analysed and interpreted GSA and LSA results and wrote the manuscript. AS contributed to design BIBW2992 of the study, implemented and ran GSA and LSA procedure, participated in interpretation of results and drafting the manuscript.

DF, SPL, DJH planned the experiments, analysed data, contributed to drafting the manuscript. PD0325901 cost AG contributed to ErbB2/3 model development. PM performed the RPPA and in cell Western studies. SPL, DJH and IG contributed to design and coordination of the study, gave valuable advice and critically revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. The Centre for Systems Biology at Edinburgh is a Centre for Integrative Systems Biology (CISB) funded by BBSRC and EPSRC, reference BB/D019621/1.

We also acknowledge support from Breakthrough Breast Cancer and the Scottish Funding Council. This work has made use of the resources provided by the Edinburgh Compute and Data Facility (ECDF) (http://www.ecdf.ed.ac.uk/). The ECDF is partially supported by the eDIKT initiative (http://www.edikt.org.uk). AG acknowledges the financial support of SICSA (Scottish Informatics and Computer Science Alliance). Authors are also grateful to Jane Hillston for helpful comments on the manuscript. “
“The allotype of omalizumab was erroneously reported to be G1m(f). However, the allotype of omalizumab is G1m(z), as determined serologically in our laboratory. The confusion arises from the fact Cediranib (AZD2171) that genetically, a and z are linked in such a way that one normally does not encounter z without a. Probably, omalizumab was engineered to introduce the allotype non-a (corresponding to E356/M358, as opposed to allotype a: D356/L358). The conclusions of the paper are not affected in any way. Different (CH3)2 and pFc’ fragments were compared. Here, only the a and non-a allotypic differences play a role. Whether these fragments are derived from antibodies that are either f or z is not relevant, since these allotypic markers are present in the CH1 domain. Thus, in Fig. 4C, the pFc’ fragment indicated as IgG1 (f) pFc’ corresponds to E356/M358, and this fragment should be labelled IgG1 (non-a) pFc’.