The authors made the following changes to their paper [1]. The authors noticed a mistake on the SF-1 results for the cell line NCI-H295 in Figure 6. A mistake happened during data transfer for graph preparation. The authors are very sorry about this error. They have now repeated the specific experiment for a total of five times; it was performed by two independent persons and with two different primer pairs (only the original primer pair is included here, but two different primer pairs were used to ensure that the effect between different SF-1 primers is consistent). Figure 6I (marked in red) was corrected from to A correction has been made to Section 3.7: The sentence “In contrast, HSD17B4 remained unchanged and the AR, ER1 and SF-1 were conversely down-regulated for NCI-H295R.For TVBF-7, again, all levels remained unchanged” was modified to “In contrast, HSD17B4 remained unchanged, SF-1 was upregulated and AR and ER1 were conversely down-regulated for NCI-H295R. For TVBF-7, again, all levels remained unchanged”. A correction has been made to Section 4, paragraphs 4 and 5: The sentence “Of note, SF-1 is a key regulator of human sex determination [39] and was upon FSK stimulation strikingly different regulated in NCI-H295R (down), MUC-1 (up) and TVBF-7 (unchanged)” was corrected to “Of note, SF-1 is a key regulator of human sex determination [39] and its activation might lead to different downstream effects in tissues of male and female origin”. The sentence “Of note, the AR was again markedly different regulated following the same patterns as observed for SF-1 in NCI-H295R (down), MUC-1 (up) and TVBF-7 (unchanged)” was corrected to “Of note, the AR was markedly differently regulated in NCI-H295R (down), MUC-1 (up) and TVBF-7 (unchanged)”. The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.