Neutralizing antibodies from early cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection offer cross-protection against the SARS-CoV-2 D614G variant
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The emergence of a SARS-CoV-2 variant with a point mutation in the spike (S) protein, D614G, has taken precedence over the original Wuhan isolate by May 2020. With an increased infection and transmission rate, it is imperative to determine whether antibodies induced against the D614 isolate may cross-neutralize against the G614 variant. In this report, profiling of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 humoral immunity reveals similar neutralization profiles against both S protein variants, albeit waning neutralizing antibody capacity at the later phase of infection. These findings provide further insights towards the validity of current immune-based interventions.
IMPORTANCE
Random mutations in the viral genome is a naturally occurring event that may lead to enhanced viral fitness and immunological resistance, while heavily impacting the validity of licensed therapeutics. A single point mutation from aspartic acid (D) to glycine (G) at position 614 of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein, termed D614G, has garnered global attention due to the observed increase in transmissibility and infection rate. Given that a majority of the developing antibody-mediated therapies and serological assays are based on the S antigen of the original Wuhan reference sequence, it is crucial to determine if humoral immunity acquired from the original SARS-CoV-2 isolate is able to induce cross-detection and cross-protection against the novel prevailing D614G variant.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.08.332544: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
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).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.08.332544: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
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).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- No conflict of interest statement was detected. If there are no conflicts, we encourage authors to explicit state so.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
