The authors would like to make the following corrections to this published paper [1].
In the original publication, there was an inaccuracy in Table 1 as the CDC instead of the FDA indications had been reported erroneously for RSVPreF in the United States. The corrected Table 1 is attached below.
Table 1.
Current (as of November 2024) approval status of RSV vaccines for the prevention of RSV-LRTD in Europe and the United States. According to the updated recommendations by the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a single dose of any FDA-approved RSV vaccine is recommended for all adults aged ≥75 years and for adults aged 60–74 years who are at increased risk of severe RSV disease, while no additional doses are recommended for adults who have previously received an RSV vaccine [50].
Corrections were also necessary in Table 2 since the way we had originally presented vaccine efficacy gave the impression that the data are directly comparable. As already mentioned in the last sentence of the introduction of Section 5 (Approval Status, Safety, and Efficacy of Approved RSV Vaccines) and in the first paragraph of Section 7 (Remaining Challenges for RSV Vaccines) of the original publication, the definitions of the endpoints of the three RSV vaccines differ, and comparisons are difficult to interpret [1]. The edited Table 2 is attached below.
Table 2.
Efficacy of the three approved vaccines against RSV-associated LRTD in older adults.
Consequent to these changes, the last two sentences of the fourth paragraph in Section 5.1.2, “RSVPreF (Abrysvo, Pfizer)”, should be replaced with the following: “This overview of the available data indicates that, although it is not currently recommended, revaccination may be needed for protection against RSV-LRTD in the seasons to come, independently of which RSV vaccine is used [52].”
The last sentence of the fifth paragraph in Section 5.1.2 of the original publication should be changed simply to “the GBS reports were 4.4 cases per million administered doses of Abrysvo [59]” because the increased incidence of GBS following RSVPreF was not statistically significant.
Finally, the Conflicts of Interest should be changed to “Prof. Tsakris participated once in an Advisory Board meeting on RSV prevention in adults held in Athens by Pfizer in 2023. All the other authors declare no conflicts of interest.” This information/potential minor conflict of interest was inadvertently omitted in the original version of the article.
With this correction, the order of some references has been adjusted accordingly.
The authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience caused to the readers by these changes. The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.
Reference
- Anastassopoulou, C.; Medić, S.; Ferous, S.; Boufidou, F.; Tsakris, A. Development, Current Status, and Remaining Challenges for Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccines. Vaccines 2025, 13, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).