High fusion and cytopathy of SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.640.1
Résumé fourni par la source
ABSTRACT SARS-CoV-2 variants with undetermined properties have emerged intermittently throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Some variants possess unique phenotypes and mutations which allow further characterization of viral evolution and spike functions. Around 1100 cases of the B.1.640.1 variant were reported in Africa and Europe between 2021 and 2022, before the expansion of Omicron. Here, we analyzed the biological properties of a B.1.640.1 isolate and its spike. Compared to the ancestral spike, B.1.640.1 carried 14 amino acid substitutions and deletions. B.1.640.1 escaped binding by some anti-NTD and -RBD monoclonal antibodies, and neutralization by sera from convalescent and vaccinated individuals. In cell lines, infection generated large syncytia and a high cytopathic effect. In primary airway cells, B.1.640.1 replicated less than Omicron BA.1 and triggered more syncytia and cell death than other variants. The B.1.640.1 spike was highly fusogenic when expressed alone. This was mediated by two poorly characterized and infrequent mutations located in the spike S2 domain, T859N and D936H. Altogether, our results highlight the cytopathy of a hyper-fusogenic SARS-CoV-2 variant, supplanted upon the emergence of Omicron BA.1. Importance Our results highlight the plasticity of SARS-CoV-2 spike to generate highly fusogenic and cytopathic strains with the causative mutations being uncharacterized in previous variants. We describe mechanisms regulating the formation of syncytia and the subsequent consequences in cell lines and a primary culture model, which are poorly understood.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- High fusion and cytopathy of SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.640.1
- Date Crossref
- 11/09/2023
- Éditeur
- openRxiv
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.