Isolation and comparative analysis of antibodies that broadly neutralize sarbecoviruses
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The devastation caused by SARS-CoV-2 has made clear the importance of pandemic preparedness. To address future zoonotic outbreaks due to related viruses in the sarbecovirus subgenus, we identified a human monoclonal antibody, 10-40, that neutralized or bound all sarbecoviruses tested in vitro and protected against SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV in vivo . Comparative studies with other receptor-binding domain (RBD)-directed antibodies showed 10-40 to have the greatest breadth against sarbecoviruses and thus its promise as an agent for pandemic preparedness. Moreover, structural analyses on 10-40 and similar antibodies not only defined an epitope cluster in the inner face of the RBD that is well conserved among sarbecoviruses, but also uncovered a new antibody class with a common CDRH3 motif. Our analyses also suggested that elicitation of this class of antibodies may not be overly difficult, an observation that bodes well for the development of a pan-sarbecovirus vaccine.
One sentence summary
A monoclonal antibody that neutralizes or binds all sarbecoviruses tested and represents a reproducible antibody class.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.11.472236: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis 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: …
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.12.11.472236: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis 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: Please consider improving the rainbow (“jet”) colormap(s) used on page 22. At least one figure is not accessible to readers with colorblindness and/or is not true to the data, i.e. not perceptually uniform.
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.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-
