Mikel Urrutikoetxea-Gutierrez1, Estibaliz Ugalde Zarraga2, Mikel Gallego Rodrigo3, Jose Luis Díaz de Tuesta Del Arco2. 1. Hospital Universitario Basurto, Servicio de Microbiología Clínica, Bizkaia, Spain; Grupo de Microbiología y Control Infección, Instituto Biocruces Bizkaia, Bizkaia, Spain. Electronic address: mikel.j.urruti@gmail.com. 2. Hospital Universitario Basurto, Servicio de Microbiología Clínica, Bizkaia, Spain; Grupo de Microbiología y Control Infección, Instituto Biocruces Bizkaia, Bizkaia, Spain. 3. Hospital Universitario Cruces, Servicio de Microbiología Clínica, Bizkaia, Spain; Grupo de Microbiología y Control Infección, Instituto Biocruces Bizkaia, Bizkaia, Spain.
Since its first description in December 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern VOC-202112/01 (also known as lineage B.1.1.7, 20I/501Y.V1 or, recently, according to the WHO, simply alpha) has been spreading all over the world. In our geographical area, it became predominant from the beginning of March 2021, accounting for more than 90% of new infections in June 2021. This is mainly due to the mutations that this variant accumulates in the gene that encodes the spike (S gene), especially in the receptor-binding domain (RBD). These mutations, especially the N501Y mutation that it shares with the beta (B.1.351 or 20H/501Y.V2) and gamma (P.1 20J/501Y.V3) variants of concern, among others, are related to an increased binding affinity of the spike with angiotensin-converting enzyme II and an increase in transmissibility. These last two variants also share the E484K mutation, also in the RBD, which could be related to a certain degree of escape from the action of the vaccines. Therefore, when the first sequences of the B.1.1.7 lineage with the E484K mutation emerged, the British authorities declared them variants of concern VOC-202102/02. However, the cluster in which these variants were framed does not seem to have been as successful and represents only 0.225% of the sequences of the B.1.1.7 lineage included in the GISAID (Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data).In accordance with our centre’s variant screening protocol, all SARS-CoV-2 positive samples with Ct <32 are tested using the Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2 Variants I Assay kit (Seegene, Korea), which simultaneously detects H69/V70, E484K and N501Y mutations. At the end of April, we identified a sample which was positive for all three targets studied. In addition to the sample from the patient who had all three mutations, samples from the other three positive cases from the family cluster of which the patient had been a close contact were sequenced, presenting a profile compatible with the B.1.1.7 lineage but without the E484K mutation. For the sequencing of the viral genome, the Ion AmpliSeq SARS-CoV-2 Research Panel (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) was used. Libraries were prepared following the manufacturer’s instructions and loaded onto a 540 chip and the Ion GeneStudio™ S5 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) platform. The genome was assembled using the IRMA plugin and its consistency was checked using the Integrative Genomics Viewer (IGV) program. The Nextstrain webApp was also used for both clade assignment and visualisation of mutations. The sequences obtained by next-generation sequencing confirmed the results of the PCR variant screening techniques. The test sample presented the G23012A mutation that conditions the amino acid change in the E484K S gene. None of the other three samples had that mutation in the assembly, and the A readings at position 23012 accounted for less than 1% of the readings in each of the samples. Except for the G23012A mutation, the four strains of the family cluster were identical and had both the characteristic mutations of the B.1.1.7 lineage and some of their own (see Table 1
).
Table 1
Coverage of the mutations present in the family cluster.
Test sample
Relative 1
Relative 2
Relative 3
C241T
2935
7356
4892
3110
C913T
5499
10533
7634
5110
C3037T
6899
10817
8752
8597
C3267T
1870
6997
4489
3645
C4464T
7318
13962
8950
5797
A5041G
3407
6980
4543
2567
C5388A
4309
8448
5309
3474
G5763A
7673
12951
9983
10079
C5986T
2074
3458
1213
449
T6954C
2822
7202
3136
933
11288-11297
6911
11107
8345
7157
C11668T
5339
7078
3973
2795
C12439T
6903
11349
7622
6920
C14407T
4004
6209
3489
2521
C14408T
4006
6230
3496
2525
C14676T
5486
8911
6115
4265
T15096C
3185
5267
3462
3199
C15279T
1811
6655
4096
2838
T16176C
6050
11721
8117
9837
C18647T
2354
6501
4085
3055
21766-21772
5587
6261
5807
5072
21994-21997
7153
7985
6569
5075
G23012A
8771
A23063T
2137
5422
4300
1691
C23271A
4375
7485
6071
5999
A23403G
13281
16004
13387
13398
C23604A
9736
12985
11754
14791
C23709T
7735
11037
9594
7600
T24506G
14234
17157
15581
13242
G24914C
9398
14695
11772
7804
C27972T
25717
28812
39283
27683
G28048T
25829
28835
39267
27589
A28095T
12218
16000
19763
6728
A28111G
12192
15990
19727
6687
28274
9517
11135
18433
8315
G28280C
10624
12112
19790
8916
A28281T
10686
12175
19865
8933
T28282A
10689
12181
19875
8936
C28320T
10853
12294
20071
9036
G28881A
6831
10521
12661
5721
8882A
6840
10531
12673
5728
G28883C
6841
10531
12673
5728
C28977T
6715
10284
12336
5378
Coverage of the mutations present in the family cluster.Despite belonging to the B.1.1.7 lineage and also exhibiting the E484K mutation, the sequence of our sample did not share the rest of the characteristic mutations of VOC-202102/02. The appearance of this mutation was therefore probably independent to those found in February 2021 in the United Kingdom, similar to other synchronous appearances of this mutation. In this case, the epidemiological chain of transmission is quite clear, since the infection of the patient with the E484K mutation appeared later: one week after the rest, and when the patient had been in isolation for six days for being a close contact of a confirmed case, so this mutation probably emerged de novo, either in the patient himself or in any of the other three members of the cluster after taking their respective samples. Fortunately, the patient had no subsequent close contacts and no new variants belonging to the B.1.1.7 lineage with the E484K mutation have been observed in the daily screenings carried out in our health organisation.
Authors: Samuel S Shepard; Sarah Meno; Justin Bahl; Malania M Wilson; John Barnes; Elizabeth Neuhaus Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2016-09-05 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: James Hadfield; Colin Megill; Sidney M Bell; John Huddleston; Barney Potter; Charlton Callender; Pavel Sagulenko; Trevor Bedford; Richard A Neher Journal: Bioinformatics Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 6.931
Authors: Wilfredo F Garcia-Beltran; Evan C Lam; Kerri St Denis; Adam D Nitido; Zeidy H Garcia; Blake M Hauser; Jared Feldman; Maia N Pavlovic; David J Gregory; Mark C Poznansky; Alex Sigal; Aaron G Schmidt; A John Iafrate; Vivek Naranbhai; Alejandro B Balazs Journal: Cell Date: 2021-03-12 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Sam Abbott; Rosanna C Barnard; Christopher I Jarvis; Adam J Kucharski; James D Munday; Carl A B Pearson; Timothy W Russell; Damien C Tully; Alex D Washburne; Tom Wenseleers; Nicholas G Davies; Amy Gimma; William Waites; Kerry L M Wong; Kevin van Zandvoort; Justin D Silverman; Karla Diaz-Ordaz; Ruth Keogh; Rosalind M Eggo; Sebastian Funk; Mark Jit; Katherine E Atkins; W John Edmunds Journal: Science Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 63.714