In the original publication, there was a minor mistake in one of the figures and a number of reference citation numbers were incorrectly published. The figure and citations are corrected here:
Page 5/16—Fig. 4
Anzeige
The reference of Fig. 4 is Dang et al. [20] instead Parola et al. [19].
Fig. 4
Effect of OM-85 on IFN-β production at different concentrations (40 to 640 mcg/ml). The increase on IFN-beta production correspond with the increasing concentration of OM-85. ***p ≤ 0.001. These in vitro results represent mean ± SD (n = 3 techinal replicates). Reference: Dang et al. [20]
×
Page 5/16—Downregulation in chronic inflammatory state
The sentence “by decreasing the levels of proinflammatory cytokines (e.g. interleukin [IL]-1b) in a dose-dependent manner [24]” should be referenced by Dang et al. [20] instead of [24].
Page 6/16—Fig. 5
Anzeige
The x axis title on the right side bar in the Fig. 5 should correspond to 10 day post infection and not 5.
Fig. 5
Effect of OM-85 against viral infections in an in vivo infection model. The viral load in lung tissue was determined on day 5 and 10 post-influenza virus infection. Data are representative of 2–5 experiments with 5–10 mice per time point. Error bars represent minimum to maximum value range. Statistical analysis was performed by Student’s t test. ***p < 0.001. Reference: Pasquali et al. [21]
×
Page 6/16—Downregulation in Chronic Inflammatory State
1.
The sentence “and increasing the levels of anti-inflammatory cytokines (e.g. IL-10) [20], thus reducing tissue damage” should be referenced by Parola et al. [19] instead of Dang et al. [20].
2.
In the sentence, “OM-85 may also aid maturation of the immune system in children by correcting Th1/Th2 imbalance through increasing Th1 cytokines (IFN-γ) increasing Treg cytokines (IL-10) and decreasing Th2 cytokines (IL-4, IL-5, IL-13) [18, 24].”, reference Esposito et al. 2018 [16] should be added.
Page 7/16—Efficacy of OM-85 in Children
1.
The sentence, “In children affected by rRTIs in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, the proportion of RTI-free patients (the primary endpoint) was significantly higher in the OM-85-treated group compared with the placebo group (see Fig. 7) with total infections 35% lower with OM-85 versus placebo in all children in the study and 28% lower in children aged\6 years [33].” should be referenced by Paupe. Respiration 1991.[29] instead of [33].
2.
The sentence “OM-85 has also been associated with fewer RTIs than placebo (143 versus 299; difference of 52%; p\0.001; primary endpoint) at 6 months in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in girls aged 6–13 years [35]. OM-85 also reduced the number of infections in each patient from 494 to 143, with placebo reducing the number of infections from 509 to 299 (p\0.001, for both comparisons) [35]. There were fewer infections at each month with OM-85 compared with placebo (p\0.05, at months 2, 3, 4 and 6) [35]. OM-85 has also been reported to reduce antibiotic use, time to cure and school absenteeism; see Fig. 8 [35].” Should be referenced by Jara-Perez et al. [31] instead of [35].
3.
The sentences “OM-85 was also shown to significantly reduce the number and duration of acute RTIs (primary endpoint), with 131 acute RTIs in paediatric patients who received OM-85 compared with 224 in those who received placebo in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study [36]”. And “The mean RTIs per patient were significantly lower with OM-85 at 12 months: 5.0 vs. 8.0 (p\0.001), 38% lower (all patients) and 4.9 vs. 8.3 (p\0.01), 41% lower (patients aged under 6 years). The total duration of acute RTIs was significantly lower with OM-85 compared with placebo: median 30.5 vs. 55.0 days (p\0.001), 45% lower (all patients). A higher proportion of children (57% higher; p\0.001) without recurrences (fewer than six acute RTIs) and less antibiotic consumption (44% less; p\0.001) was also reported with OM-85 [36]”. Should be referenced by Gutierrez-Tarango et al. [32] instead of [36].
Page 8/16—Efficacy of OM-85 in Children
1.
The sentence, “In the meta-analysis published by Schaad, a 35.5% decrease in the overall mean number of paediatric acute RTIs was demonstrated with OM-85 compared with placebo [37].” Should be referenced by Schaad et al. 2010 [33] instead of [37].
2.
The sentence “This was confirmed in 2012 in an updated meta-analysis in 852 children performed by the Cochrane collaboration group in which the immunomodulatory OM-85 was shown to significantly reduce total acute RTIs by 35.9% [38].” should be referenced by De-Rio-Navarro et al. 2012 [34] instead of [38].
Page 9/16—Concomitant Use of OM-85 and Inactivated Influenza Vaccine /OM-85 and Virus-Induced Wheezing
3.
“Follow-up for 14 days after vaccination with IIV given with or without OM-85 showed that OM-85 administered with IIV was well tolerated in the short term [39].” Should be referenced by Esposito et al. 2015 [35] instead of [39].
4.
“The impact of treatment observed after 3 months was maintained for 12 months after the prescription, which shows OM-85 prevents wheezing attacks in young children [40].” should be referenced by Razi et al. 2010 [36] instead of [40].
Page 10/16—Recurrent Acute Otitis Media
1.
“Although only a small number of cases of otitis media were reported in the children in two randomised, placebo-controlled studies (8/99 and 25/100 [35] and 3/26 and 14/28 [36] in the OM-85 and placebo groups, respectively),…” should be referenced by Jara-Perez et al. 2000 [31] and Gutierrez-Tarango et al. 2001 [32] respectively, instead of [35] and [36]
“In a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial including 55 children aged 4–12 years with acute exacerbation of CRS, OM-85 significantly decreased the number (by 65%) and the total duration (by 64%) of acute episodes after 6 months compared with placebo [27].” Should be referenced by Zagar 1988 [25] instead of [27].
2.
“After a median of 9 months’ follow-up, no tonsillectomy was required in [ 50% of treated patients [47].” Should be referenced by Bitar 2013 [44] instead of [47].
3.
“A total of 75.6% patients treated and followed up responded to treatment [total response (no new episodes or recurrent tonsillitis), 51.2%; partial response (reduced re-exacerbation), 24.4%]” the “]” at the end of the sentence should be removed.
Page 12/16—Safety and Tolerability of OM-85 / Discussions and conclusions
1.
“OM-85 was also well tolerated when administered in combination with IIV, did not interfere with antibody titres of vaccine and had no observed effect on humoral immunity [39].” Should be referenced by references [35, 38, 39] instead of [39] only.
2.
“Meta-analysis of studies with available databases indicate that immunomodulators are not very effective in the prevention of an occasional acute RTI but are in the prevention of recurrent infection [37, 38, 46].” References should be [33, 34, 46] instead of [37, 38, 46].
Anzeige
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
