Shanti Pather1*
Shabir A. Madhi2
Benjamin J. Cowling3
Paul Moss4
Jeremy P. Kamil5
Sandra Ciesek6Alexander Muik1Özlem Türeci1- 1BioNTech, Mainz, Germany
- 2South African Medical Research Council Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Analytics Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
- 3School of Public Health, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
- 4Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
- 5Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center Shreveport, Shreveport, LA, United States
- 6Institute for Medical Virology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
A Corrigendum on
SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants: burden of disease, impact on vaccine effectiveness and need for variant-adapted vaccines
by Pather S, Madhi SA, Cowling BJ, Moss P, Kamil JP, Ciesek S, Muik A and Türeci Ö (2023). . 14:1130539. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1130539
In the published article, there was an error in the legend for Figure 2 as published. The figure legend was displayed as “Favored cell entry pathways of (A) Delta variant and (B) BA.1. Delta favors cell surface fusion, whereas BA.1 favors endosomal entry. Evidence suggests that BA.4 and BA.5 sub-lineages may be partially reverting back towards cell surface fusion, due to increased fusogenicity compared with BA.1. Adapted from Tang et al. Antiviral Res (2020); 178:104792 (32)”. Furthermore, The figure legend included incorrect spelling of Cathepsin L as Cathespin L. The corrected legend appears below.
Figure 2 Favored cell entry pathways of (A) BA.1 and (B) Delta variant. Delta favors cell surface fusion, whereas BA.1 favors endosomal entry. Evidence suggests that BA.4 and BA.5 sub-lineages may be partially reverting back towards cell surface fusion, due to increased fusogenicity compared with BA.1. Adapted from Tang et al. Antiviral Res (2020);178:104792 (32).
“Favored cell entry pathways of (A) BA.1 and (B) Delta variant. Delta favors cell surface fusion, whereas BA.1 favors endosomal entry. Evidence suggests that BA.4 and BA.5 sublineages may be partially reverting back towards cell surface fusion, due to increased fusogenicity compared with BA.1. Adapted from Tang et al. Antiviral Res (2020); 178:104792 (32).”
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Keywords: sub-lineage, BA.1, vaccine, disease burden, Omicron
Citation: Pather S, Madhi SA, Cowling BJ, Moss P, Kamil JP, Ciesek S, Muik A and Türeci Ö (2023) Corrigendum: SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants: burden of disease, impact on vaccine effectiveness and need for variant-adapted vaccines. Front. Immunol. 14:1232965. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1232965
Received: 01 June 2023; Accepted: 02 June 2023;
Published: 12 June 2023.
Approved by:
Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, SwitzerlandCopyright © 2023 Pather, Madhi, Cowling, Moss, Kamil, Ciesek, Muik and Türeci. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Shanti Pather, Shanti.Pather@biontech.de