Received Feb 17, 2026
| Type | Name | Manufacturer | Dose | Lot | Route / Site |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VARZOS | ZOSTER (NO BRAND NAME) | UNKNOWN MANUFACTURER | 3 | UNK | — |
| VARZOS | ZOSTER (NO BRAND NAME) | UNKNOWN MANUFACTURER | 2 | UNK | — |
| VARZOS | ZOSTER (NO BRAND NAME) | UNKNOWN MANUFACTURER | 1 | UNK | — |
Shingles; Patient received the first shingles vaccine, after many years later received two shots; Patient received the first shingles vaccine, after many years later received two shots; This non-serious case was reported by a consumer via interactive digital media and described the occurrence of shingles in a patient who received Herpes zoster (Shingles vaccine) for prophylaxis. Co-suspect products included Herpes zoster (Shingles vaccine) for prophylaxis and Herpes zoster (Shingles vaccine) for prophylaxis. On an unknown date, the patient received the 3rd dose of Shingles vaccine, the 2nd dose of Shingles vaccine and the 1st dose of Shingles vaccine. On an unknown date, not applicable after receiving Shingles vaccine and Shingles vaccine and several years after receiving Shingles vaccine, the patient experienced shingles (Verbatim: Shingles), drug dose administration interval too long (Verbatim: Patient received the first shingles vaccine, after many years later received two shots) and extra dose administered (Verbatim: Patient received the first shingles vaccine, after many years later received two shots). The outcome of the shingles was not reported and the outcome of the drug dose administration interval too long and extra dose administered were not applicable. It was unknown if the reporter considered the shingles to be related to Shingles vaccine. It was unknown if the company considered the shingles to be related to Shingles vaccine. Additional Information: GSK Receipt Date: 10-FEB-2026 This case was reported by a patient via interactive digital media. The patient was trying to find out. The reporter thought that like 7 or eight years and he/she would call insurance and asked but he/she knew they were not forever. The first one the doctors thought the same. The patient should have been given again after three or four years. The patient had the first shot but got shingles many years later, shingles was the worst thing ever and he/she had a very mild case. The patient should have had a second shot but he/she got the two shots after they came out. The batch number was not provided and unable to contact the reporter.