Literature DB >> 35641566

Up or down: where comes Omicron?

Zezhong Liu1, Lu Lu1, Shibo Jiang2,3.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 35641566      PMCID: PMC9152302          DOI: 10.1038/s41422-022-00675-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cell Res        ISSN: 1001-0602            Impact factor:   46.297


× No keyword cloud information.
The current dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant Omicron BA.2 has spread globally within only two months. Recent works published in and reveal the molecular basis of increased transmissibility of Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 and their possible mouse origin. SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant with an unprecedented high rate of mutations and transmissibility has swept the world during the past several months. The high prevalence of Omicron can be attributed to their resistance to most clinically approved neutralizing antibodies, striking immune evasion from the humoral immunity elicited by the current COVID-19 vaccines and higher transmission rates.[1] Understanding the structural and functional basis of the increased transmissibility and the origin of Omicron would provide insights into developing countermeasures against the COVID-19 pandemic. Most recently, Yin, Xu and colleagues have reported in Science[2] and Cell Research[3] the cryo-EM structures of Omicron BA.1/BA.2 spike trimer in complex with human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (hACE2) (Fig. 1a). Structurally, the Omicron receptor-binding domain (RBD) adopts two conformations, up and down. Only the “up” RBD exposes the receptor-binding site. They firstly observed an RBD (up)–RBD (down) interaction for the BA.1 and BA.2, which was not found in the wild-type (WT) spike trimer previously. The up–down RBD dimer stabilizes the up conformation of one RBD and thus promotes hACE2 binding, leading to higher affinity of Omicron RBD to hACE2 compared to that of WT. The newly discovered up–down RBD dimer may be a good target for developing therapeutics or vaccines. Therefore, it would be interesting to explore whether the RBD dimer is a good conformational immunogen to induce more broad or potent neutralizing antibodies. Moreover, two or three RBDs bind at least two hACE2 molecules for BA.2. By contrast, only one RBD in open conformation was observed to bind one hACE2 molecule for BA.1. This discovery seems to explain the stronger hACE2-binding capacity of BA.2 than that of BA.1 (Fig. 1a). The Omicron RBD is more dynamic than WT RBD. It will also be constructive to determine whether stabilizing the RBD in unique states such as all down or all up would increase the breadth of the neutralizing antibody.
Fig. 1

Cryo-EM structures of Omicron BA.1/BA.2 spike trimer in complex with hACE2, JMB2002, or mACE2.

a Comparison of cryo-EM maps of WT, BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–hACE2 complexes. The PDB IDs for the complexes of WT, BA.1, and BA.2 spike trimer–hACE2 are 7A94, 7WPA, and 7XO7, respectively. b Comparison of hACE2 binding affinity of RBD and stability among WT, BA.1, and BA.2. c Cryo-EM density maps of BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–JMB2002 Fab complexes. The EMDB IDs for BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–JMB2002 Fab complexes are EMD-32684 and EMD-33345, respectively. d Cryo-EM maps of BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–mACE2 complexes. The PDB IDs for the complexes of BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–mACE2 are 7XO5 and 7XOA, respectively. e Possible route of evolution for Omicron.

Cryo-EM structures of Omicron BA.1/BA.2 spike trimer in complex with hACE2, JMB2002, or mACE2.

a Comparison of cryo-EM maps of WT, BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–hACE2 complexes. The PDB IDs for the complexes of WT, BA.1, and BA.2 spike trimer–hACE2 are 7A94, 7WPA, and 7XO7, respectively. b Comparison of hACE2 binding affinity of RBD and stability among WT, BA.1, and BA.2. c Cryo-EM density maps of BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–JMB2002 Fab complexes. The EMDB IDs for BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–JMB2002 Fab complexes are EMD-32684 and EMD-33345, respectively. d Cryo-EM maps of BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–mACE2 complexes. The PDB IDs for the complexes of BA.1 and BA.2 spike trimer–mACE2 are 7XO5 and 7XOA, respectively. e Possible route of evolution for Omicron. Atomic model of hACE2-bound Omicron RBD revealed that K417N loses a salt bridge with hACE2 D30, while Q493R and Q498R form two new salt bridges with E35 and D38 of hACE2, resulting in a net enhanced binding capacity of BA.1/BA.2 to hACE2, which was consistent with a previous study.[4] These results elucidate why the BA.1/BA.2 retains efficient receptor engagement, while harboring many mutations. However, decreased binding activities were observed for BA.4/BA.5 by other research group due to substitutions of F486V and R493Q, which might hinder the speed of BA.4/BA.5 spreading.[5] The authors also found that Omicron BA.2 exhibited the highest binding capacity to hACE2, with 2-fold and 11-fold higher than those of BA.1 and WT, respectively (Fig. 1b). Furthermore, BA.2 exhibited higher stability than BA.1 due to the intermolecular hydrogen bond formed by N405 and R403 (Fig. 1b). The higher stability and hACE2-binding capacity of BA.2 relative to BA.1 might be the reason why BA.2 has gradually replaced BA.1 sublineage. A novel epitope targeted by the BA.1/BA.2 neutralizing antibody JMB2002 was reported by the authors (Fig. 1c). However, JMB2002 could not neutralize Delta due to the substitution of L452R. Delta may make a comeback in the future. Moreover, the BA.4/BA.5 also exhibits the L452R substitution. Developing a bispecific neutralizing antibody targeting the epitope of JMB2002 and another highly conserved region such as sarbecovirus epitope may be an alternative for broadly combating multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants. However, since the S1 containing main neutralizing epitopes is under high mutation pressure, it is difficult to develop S1-specific broad-spectrum therapeutics. To combat SARS-CoV-2 variants, drugs targeting the conserved S2 region such as HR1 and HR2 need to be developed.[6] For example, peptides EK1 and EK1C4 targeting HR1 have shown efficacy as pan-coronavirus inhibitors against the current SARS-CoV-2 variants.[7] The evolution of Omicron is independent of all previous SARS-CoV-2 variants. The Omicron RBD can effectively bind to mouse ACE2 (mACE2), while other variants, such as Alpha and Beta only weakly bind mACE2.[4,8] Xu, Yin and colleagues further elucidated the cryo-EM structures and molecular interactions between BA.1/BA.2 and mACE2 (Fig. 1d). The substitutions of Q493R, Q498R, and N501Y in the Omicron RBD play an essential role in enabling efficient mACE2 binding. Notably, several mouse-adapted strains reported contain these mutations, such as MASCp6[9] (N501Y), MA10[10] (Q493K), and WBP-1[11] (Q493K and Q498H). Since cats are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2, the authors speculate that the virus from humans or cats might be passed to mice and evolve to Omicron (Fig. 1e). WT or other variants might infect aged mice firstly because aged mice are more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2,[9] and mutations like those mentioned above occurred in the virus after several passages, leading to infection in young adult mice and finally evolving into Omicron. Whether mouse is the origin of Omicron remains to be further investigated. Nevertheless, the idea of potential animal hosts, such as minks, pangolins, cats, dogs and other wild animals, is alarmingly plausible. Accordingly, the surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 mutations in these hosts needs to be continuously performed. In summary, the findings from Xu, Yin and colleagues shed light on the mechanism of high transmissibility and the possible mouse origin of Omicron, which should pave the way for designing a preventive strategy across the spectrum of coronavirus mutations and, correspondingly, developing broad-spectrum vaccines and drugs against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.
  8 in total

Review 1.  Antivirals with common targets against highly pathogenic viruses.

Authors:  Lu Lu; Shan Su; Haitao Yang; Shibo Jiang
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 41.582

2.  Structural basis of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron immune evasion and receptor engagement.

Authors:  Matthew McCallum; Nadine Czudnochowski; Laura E Rosen; Samantha K Zepeda; John E Bowen; Alexandra C Walls; Kevin Hauser; Anshu Joshi; Cameron Stewart; Josh R Dillen; Abigail E Powell; Tristan I Croll; Jay Nix; Herbert W Virgin; Davide Corti; Gyorgy Snell; David Veesler
Journal:  Science       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 63.714

3.  Broadly neutralizing antibodies overcome SARS-CoV-2 Omicron antigenic shift.

Authors:  Elisabetta Cameroni; John E Bowen; Laura E Rosen; Christian Saliba; Samantha K Zepeda; Katja Culap; Dora Pinto; Laura A VanBlargan; Anna De Marco; Julia di Iulio; Fabrizia Zatta; Hannah Kaiser; Julia Noack; Nisar Farhat; Nadine Czudnochowski; Colin Havenar-Daughton; Kaitlin R Sprouse; Josh R Dillen; Abigail E Powell; Alex Chen; Cyrus Maher; Li Yin; David Sun; Leah Soriaga; Jessica Bassi; Chiara Silacci-Fregni; Claes Gustafsson; Nicholas M Franko; Jenni Logue; Najeeha Talat Iqbal; Ignacio Mazzitelli; Jorge Geffner; Renata Grifantini; Helen Chu; Andrea Gori; Agostino Riva; Olivier Giannini; Alessandro Ceschi; Paolo Ferrari; Pietro E Cippà; Alessandra Franzetti-Pellanda; Christian Garzoni; Peter J Halfmann; Yoshihiro Kawaoka; Christy Hebner; Lisa A Purcell; Luca Piccoli; Matteo Samuele Pizzuto; Alexandra C Walls; Michael S Diamond; Amalio Telenti; Herbert W Virgin; Antonio Lanzavecchia; Gyorgy Snell; David Veesler; Davide Corti
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 69.504

4.  Q493K and Q498H substitutions in Spike promote adaptation of SARS-CoV-2 in mice.

Authors:  Kun Huang; Yufei Zhang; Xianfeng Hui; Ya Zhao; Wenxiao Gong; Ting Wang; Shaoran Zhang; Yong Yang; Fei Deng; Qiang Zhang; Xi Chen; Ying Yang; Xiaomei Sun; Huanchun Chen; Yizhi J Tao; Zhong Zou; Meilin Jin
Journal:  EBioMedicine       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 8.143

5.  A Mouse-Adapted SARS-CoV-2 Induces Acute Lung Injury and Mortality in Standard Laboratory Mice.

Authors:  Sarah R Leist; Kenneth H Dinnon; Alexandra Schäfer; Longping V Tse; Kenichi Okuda; Yixuan J Hou; Ande West; Caitlin E Edwards; Wes Sanders; Ethan J Fritch; Kendra L Gully; Trevor Scobey; Ariane J Brown; Timothy P Sheahan; Nathaniel J Moorman; Richard C Boucher; Lisa E Gralinski; Stephanie A Montgomery; Ralph S Baric
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 41.582

6.  Peptide-based pan-CoV fusion inhibitors maintain high potency against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.

Authors:  Shuai Xia; Jasper Fuk-Woo Chan; Lijue Wang; Fanke Jiao; Kenn Ka-Heng Chik; Hin Chu; Qiaoshuai Lan; Wei Xu; Qian Wang; Chao Wang; Kwok-Yung Yuen; Lu Lu; Shibo Jiang
Journal:  Cell Res       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 46.297

7.  Structures of the Omicron spike trimer with ACE2 and an anti-Omicron antibody.

Authors:  Wanchao Yin; Youwei Xu; Peiyu Xu; Xiaodan Cao; Canrong Wu; Chunyin Gu; Xinheng He; Xiaoxi Wang; Sijie Huang; Qingning Yuan; Kai Wu; Wen Hu; Zifu Huang; Jia Liu; Zongda Wang; Fangfang Jia; Kaiwen Xia; Peipei Liu; Xueping Wang; Bin Song; Jie Zheng; Hualiang Jiang; Xi Cheng; Yi Jiang; Su-Jun Deng; H Eric Xu
Journal:  Science       Date:  2022-02-08       Impact factor: 63.714

8.  Adaptation of SARS-CoV-2 in BALB/c mice for testing vaccine efficacy.

Authors:  Hongjing Gu; Qi Chen; Guan Yang; Lei He; Hang Fan; Yong-Qiang Deng; Shibo Jiang; Shihui Sun; Cheng-Feng Qin; Yusen Zhou; Yanxiao Wang; Yue Teng; Zhongpeng Zhao; Yujun Cui; Yuchang Li; Xiao-Feng Li; Jiangfan Li; Na-Na Zhang; Xiaolan Yang; Shaolong Chen; Yan Guo; Guangyu Zhao; Xiliang Wang; De-Yan Luo; Hui Wang; Xiao Yang; Yan Li; Gencheng Han; Yuxian He; Xiaojun Zhou; Shusheng Geng; Xiaoli Sheng
Journal:  Science       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 47.728

  8 in total
  2 in total

Review 1.  Origin, virological features, immune evasion and intervention of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages.

Authors:  Shuai Xia; Lijue Wang; Yun Zhu; Lu Lu; Shibo Jiang
Journal:  Signal Transduct Target Ther       Date:  2022-07-19

Review 2.  Development of variant-proof severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, pan-sarbecovirus, and pan-β-coronavirus vaccines.

Authors:  Jie Zhou; Zezhong Liu; Guangxu Zhang; Wei Xu; Lixiao Xing; Lu Lu; Qian Wang; Shibo Jiang
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2022-09-25       Impact factor: 20.693

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.