Model-based cellular kinetic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 infection: different immune response modes and treatment strategies

  1. Zhengqing Zhou
  2. Ziheng Zhao
  3. Shuyu Shi
  4. Jianghua Wu
  5. Dianjie Li
  6. Jianwei Li
  7. Jingpeng Zhang
  8. Ke Gui
  9. Yu Zhang
  10. Heng Mei
  11. Yu Hu
  12. Qi Ouyang
  13. Fangting Li

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Increasing number in global COVID-19 cases demands for mathematical model to analyze the interaction between the virus dynamics and the response of innate and adaptive immunity. Here, based on the assumption of a weak and delayed response of the innate and adaptive immunity in SARS-CoV-2 infection, we constructed a mathematical model to describe the dynamic processes of immune system. Integrating theoretical results with clinical COVID-19 patients’ data, we classified the COVID-19 development processes into three typical modes of immune responses, correlated with the clinical classification of mild & moderate, severe and critical patients. We found that the immune efficacy (the ability of host to clear virus and kill infected cells) and the lymphocyte supply (the abundance and pool of naïve T and B cell) play important roles in the dynamic process and determine the clinical outcome, especially for the severe and critical patients. Furthermore, we put forward possible treatment strategies for the three typical modes of immune response. We hope our results can help to understand the dynamical mechanism of the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to be useful for the treatment strategies and vaccine design.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.01.11.21249562: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot 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:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • 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.

    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 checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.01.11.21249562 on medRxiv