Cross-reactive Antibody Response between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV Infections

  1. Huibin Lv
  2. Nicholas C. Wu
  3. Owen Tak-Yin Tsang
  4. Meng Yuan
  5. Ranawaka A.P.M. Perera
  6. Wai Shing Leung
  7. Ray T.Y. So
  8. Jacky Man Chun Chan
  9. Garrick K. Yip
  10. Thomas Shiu Hong Chik
  11. Yiquan Wang
  12. Chris Yau Chung Choi
  13. Yihan Lin
  14. Wilson W. Ng
  15. Jincun Zhao
  16. Leo L.M. Poon
  17. J.S. Malik Peiris
  18. Ian A. Wilson
  19. Chris K.P. Mok

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.15.993097: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementMethods Recruitment of patients and specimen collections Patients with RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 disease at the Infectious Disease Centre of the Princess Margaret Hospital , Hong Kong , were invited to participate in the study after providing informed consent .Randomizationnot detected.Blindingnot detected.Power Analysisnot detected.Sex as a biological variablenot detected.Cell Line Authenticationnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Whether these non-neutralizing antibody responses will lead to antibody-dependent disease enhancement needs to be addressed in the future.
    antibody-dependent disease
    suggested: None
    Cross-reactivity in mouse infection and vaccination To further investigate the cross-reactivity of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV , we analyzed the antibody response of plasma collected from mice infected or immunized with SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-CoV ( n = 5 or 6 per experimental and control groups) .
    SARS-CoV
    suggested: None
    On the contrary , non-neutralizing antibody responses can also lead to antibody-dependent enhancement ( ADE ) of infection as reported in other coronaviruses ( Tseng et al. , 2012; Wang et al. , 2014; Weiss and Scott , 1981) .
    antibody-dependent enhancement ( ADE
    suggested: None
    After extensive washing with PBS containing 0.1% Tween 20, each well in the plate was further incubated with the HRPsheep anti-mouse or anti-human secondary antibody (1:5000, GE Healthcare) for 1 hour at 37°C.
    anti-human
    suggested: None
    Experimental Models: Cell Lines
    SentencesResources
    Microneutralization assay Plasma samples were diluted in serial two-fold dilutions commencing with a dilution of 1:10, and mixed with equal volumes of SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-2 at a dose of 200 tissue culture infective doses 50% (TCID50) determined by Vero and Vero E6 cells respectively.
    Vero E6
    suggested: CVCL_XD71

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the manuscript, and detects sentences that appear to be missing RRIDs. SciScore also checks to make sure that rigor criteria are addressed by authors. It does this by detecting sentences that discuss criteria such as blinding or power analysis. SciScore does not guarantee that the rigor criteria that it detects are appropriate for the particular study. Instead it assists authors, editors, and reviewers by drawing attention to sections of the manuscript that contain or should contain various rigor criteria and key resources. For details on the results shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.107725
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.03.15.993097v1 on bioRxiv