Correction to: GeroScience

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-023-01037-4

The original version of this article contained a few errors introduced during the typesetting process.

There were errors in the brackets used to delimit age intervals in the abstract and Table 2. We have corrected the age intervals to avoid any confusion.

“semi-supercentenarians ([105–110] years old)” has been corrected to “semi-supercentenarians ([105–109] years old)” in the Abstract.

“[90–100]; nonagenarians”, “[100–105]”, and “[105–110]; semi-supercentenarians” have been corrected to “[90–99]; nonagenarians”, “[100–104]”, and “[105–109]; semi-supercentenarians” in Table 2, respectively. 

New Table 2:

Table 2 Demographic characteristics of the long-lived individuals from the CEPH Aging cohort
Full size table

Table 3 was incorrectly justified and had a typo, which has been corrected.

New Table 3:

Table 3 Quantitative epidemiologic and clinical data available for long-lived individuals from the CEPH Aging cohort
Full size table

We have also corrected gene names that were not italicized in the Discussion.

“It allowed the identification of APOE (p < 0.001) and ACE (p < 0.01) as the first genes associated with human longevity in 1994 using a candidate gene approach in a case–control study including 338 centenarians and 410 adults aged 20–70 years [22]. However, while APOE association was largely replicated in many other studies [23, 24], ACE association should be considered as a false positive signal due to genotyping issues [32].” was corrected to “It allowed the identification of APOE (p < 0.001) and ACE (p < 0.01) as the first genes associated with human longevity in 1994 using a candidate gene approach in a case–control study including 338 centenarians and 410 adults aged 20–70 years [22]. However, while APOE association was largely replicated in many other studies [23, 24], ACE association should be considered as a false positive signal due to genotyping issues [32].”