| Literature DB >> 35472451 |
Swarnali Das1, Sovan Samanta1, Jhimli Banerjee1, Amitava Pal2, Biplab Giri1, Suvrendu Sankar Kar3, Sandeep Kumar Dash4.
Abstract
In the middle of November 2021, Omicron (B.1.1.529), a novel variant of SARS-CoV-2 was identified in South Africa. Owing to continuous increasing cases with rapid transmissibility and immune evasion, the World Health Organization (WHO) has categorized this strain as a variant of concern (VOC). In total, over 60 mutations have been identified in Omicron (BA.1) and latterly, its three sub-lineages (BA.1.1, BA.2, and BA.3) have also been found with additional mutations and pathogenicity. The highly contagious Omicron causes less severe sickness than Delta, but it is still dangerous for those who have not been vaccinated. Following the unique identification of the Omicron variant, a fresh debate has erupted regarding the natural vaccines. A number of experts believe that Omicron can work as a natural vaccine, because it is similar to live attenuated vaccines in certain ways. Additionally, it was highlighted that the high rate of antibody generation in individuals cured of Omicron provide suggestive evidence in favor of those researchers who claimed Omicron acts as natural vaccine. Some disagreements also noted, as it also has tremendous health effects and high infection rate, as similar to the prior variants. This review summarizes the contradictory scenario among the scientists about Omicron variant.Entities:
Keywords: Delta; Mutation; Natural vaccine; Omicron; SARS-CoV-2; VOC
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35472451 PMCID: PMC9033632 DOI: 10.1016/j.tmaid.2022.102332
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Travel Med Infect Dis ISSN: 1477-8939 Impact factor: 20.441
Fig. 1The schematic presentation of region specific mutational landscape of the different variants of SARS-CoV-2. The several mutations especially in the 'S' protein and ORF domain of the different VOCs i.e. Alpha , Beta , Gamma , Delta and Omicron are shown in this diagram.
Fig. 2Number of common mutations in 'S' protein region among the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 and its own sub-lineages. Here, 21 common mutations are represented among the Omicron (BA.1) and its sub-lineages BA.1.1, BA.2, BA.3 respectively.
Fig. 3Representation of several common mutations amid the new variant of concern BA.1 (Omicron) and its sub-lineages i.e. BA.1.1, BA.2 and BA.3. Eight common mutations are found in 'S' protein domain of BA.1 and BA.1.1. Similarly, ten types of identical mutations also observed among the BA.1, BA.1.1 and BA.3. Between the BA.2 and BA.3 more other two types of significant common mutations are identified.
This table summarizes the characteristics of the new Variant of Concern (Omicron: BA.1) and its sub-lineages (BA.1.1, BA.2 and BA.3). Additionally, very brief information about vaccine efficacy and combined antibiotic potency against BA.1 and its respective sub-lineages is provided.
| Omicron and its sub lineages | Pango lineages | Molecular weight | No of mutations | Unique mutation | Remarks | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Omicron (BA.1) | B.1.1.529.1 | 141,328.11 | 39 | – | BA.1 is more likely to infect and reproduce in the upper respiratory tract than delta variant, whereas delta is more likely to infect and multiply in the lower respiratory tract. Early results revealed that the two-dose COVID vaccination schedule was less effective than prior variations against milder sickness caused by BA.1. It has been discovered that administering a third “booster” dose provides higher protection. Ronapreve (a monoclonal antibody combination of casirivimab and imdevimab) was reported to have decreased efficacy against BA.1. Another antibody therapy, sotrovimab, seems to retain anti-BA.1 spike protein action. The antiviral molnupiravir was also found to retain activity against BA.1 in six preclinical tests; however clinical trials have not yet been conducted. | [ |
| BA.1.1 | B.1.1.529.1.1 | 141300.09 | 40 | One (R346K) | S309 (the precursor of sotrovimab), which has been shown to have lower neutralizing activity against omicron/BA.1.1. The combination of REGN10987 and REGN10933 (marketed as casirivimab) inhibited omicron/BA.2 but did not inhibit omicron/BA.1 or omicron/BA.1.1. | [ |
| BA.2 | B.1.1.529.2 | 141,185.78 | 31 | Eight (T19I, L24del (deletion), P25del, P26del, A27S, V213G, T376A, R408S | The UKHSA's preliminary investigations showed no evidence that COVID vaccines were less effective against symptomatic disease when compared to BA.1. For, BA.2 vaccination efficacy against symptomatic infection was reported to be 13% at least 25 weeks after two doses (versus 9% for BA.1). This jumped to 70% two weeks following a third booster dose (versus 63% for BA.1). | [ |
| BA.3 | B.1.1.529.3 | 140900.61 | 34 | One (R408S) | Some researchers have hypothesized that the reason for BA.3's delayed spread may be due to the fact that it does not contain the six extra mutations that BA.1 does. Best of our knowledge nothing is yet know about COVID vaccine effectiveness against this omicron sub-variant. | [ |