SARS-CoV-2 と COVID-19 に関するメモ・備忘録
研究結果:再感染がコビド長期障害リスクを高める
「たとえ1回目に感染を免れても、2回目には長いコビッドに感染する可能性があることを理解しておく必要がある。3回目には長いコビッドに感染する可能性があるのです」 https://t.co/Y4tz10e6Uu— R連続体 MT Ph.D D.H.Sc. (@Rrenzokutai) October 3, 2023
Study: Reinfection contributes additional risk of long Covid
"People need to understand that you can get long Covid the second time, even if you dodged the bullet the first time. You can get long Covid the third time."
— CoronaHeadsUp (@CoronaHeadsUp) October 3, 2023
日本におけるlong COVID。
2020/1-2021/2、入院を要した18歳以上のCOVID-19患者1066名対象。
1つ以上の症状があった者の割合は3ヵ月後46.3%,6ヵ月後40.5%,12ヵ月後33.0%。
1つ以上の症状があった者ではQOLが低く、抑うつ、不安、COVID-19への恐れのスコアが高かった。
女性、41-64歳、酸素需要、→— Sukuna (@SukunaBikona7) October 3, 2023
入院時に重症状態であることがlong COVIDのリスクであった。https://t.co/cr9Tz2e6fK
— Sukuna (@SukunaBikona7) October 3, 2023
インフルエンザでの入院なんてここ4年くらい全然なかったのに、ここ1-2ヶ月で急にインフルエンザ脳症やインフルエンザによる熱性けいれん、インフルエンザ肺炎などの入院が出てきたので流行を感じる。
— Sukuna (@SukunaBikona7) October 4, 2023
◆Comprehensive analysis of long COVID in a Japanese nationwide prospective cohort study【nature 2023年9月30日】
Abstract
Background
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread rapidly since 2019, and the number of reports regarding long COVID has increased. Although the distribution of long COVID depends on patient characteristics, epidemiological data on Japanese patients are limited. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the distribution of long COVID in Japanese patients. This study is the first nationwide Japanese prospective cohort study on long COVID.
Methods
This multicenter, prospective cohort study enrolled hospitalized COVID-19 patients aged ≥18 years at 26 Japanese medical institutions. In total, 1200 patients were enrolled. Clinical information and patient-reported outcomes were collected from medical records, paper questionnaires, and smartphone applications.
Results
We collected data from 1066 cases with both medical records and patient-reported outcomes. The proportion of patients with at least one symptom decreased chronologically from 93.9% (947/1009) during hospitalization to 46.3% (433/935), 40.5% (350/865), and 33.0% (239/724) at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Patients with at least one long COVID symptom showed lower quality of life and scored higher on assessments for depression, anxiety, and fear of COVID-19. Female sex, middle age (41–64 years), oxygen requirement, and critical condition during hospitalization were risk factors for long COVID.
Conclusions
This study elucidated the symptom distribution and risks of long COVID in the Japanese population. This study provides reference data for future studies of long COVID in Japan.
Introduction
The first case of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was reported in Wuhan, China, in December 2019; after that, it spread rapidly across the globe, including Japan. The development of vaccines and therapeutic drugs has reduced the mortality rate of COVID-19; however, as of September 10, 2022, more than 613 million people had been infected worldwide, and more than 6.5 million people had died. More than 20 million people in Japan have been infected, and 42,000 have died. Currently, the number of infected patients is still increasing. Since the latter half of 2020, various systemic symptoms have been reported to persist after the acute phase of COVID-19 and have been referred to as long COVID in the United Kingdom, post-acute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the United States, and post COVID-19 condition by the World Health Organization (WHO).
Large-scale studies on long COVID have been conducted worldwide. For example, a large cohort study of 1733 COVID-19 cases in Wuhan, China, discharged between January 2020 and May 2020, showed that at six months post-COVID, 63% of patients had fatigue or weakness, 26% had sleep disturbances, 22% had hair loss, and 23% had anxiety or depression. In the follow-up reports from Wuhan, the percentage of patients with at least one symptom decreased from 68% after six months to 49% after 12 months. By August 2022, multiple systematic reviews of long COVID had been published, most of which mentioned the limitations of individual studies, such as target patient bias concerning the disease severity, generation, presence or absence of vaccination, and the method of approaching participants. Previous reports have consistently pointed out that long COVID symptoms are found in severe and mild cases. Therefore, a comprehensive study on patients with a wide range of medical histories is necessary as patients show various symptoms related to multiple organs.
The number of studies on long COVID in Japan is still limited; most are small-scale studies. We have reported nationwide Japanese epidemiological data regarding racial differences in the acute phase of COVID-19, especially its symptoms, clinical course, and prognosis. Long COVID may differ among races and nations, considering that SARS-CoV-2 induces unique symptoms in the Japanese population due to their specific genetic backgrounds. Therefore, we conducted the first large cohort study to characterize long COVID in Japan.
タミフルまでも供給が滞り始めている。今の状況でも薬不足。コロナなどの感染症は冬にまた増える。インフルも今のような厳しい状況が続くだろう。冬は一体どうなってしまうのか https://t.co/FZn4g2cInY
— Takuro⚓️コロナ情報in全国/神奈川/横浜/川崎/東京/大阪/岐阜/広島/宮崎/愛知/静岡 (@triangle24) October 4, 2023
呼吸器系疾患が蔓延しているベルギーのルーヴェン地方では、下水から10種類以上の呼吸器系疾患ウイルスが検出されたという情報。コロナウイルス全種類と、RSV、EVD68 を含むエンテロウイルス、ライノウイルス、ボカウイルス、アデノウイルス、パレコウイルス、パラインフルエンザ 4、CMV等。 https://t.co/ycyP3eCC47
— Angama (@Angama_Market) October 5, 2023
イギリスで2020年夏に政府によって展開された、「外食して応援」政策はコロナウイルス感染を余計に広げた可能性が非常に高いと政府の対応調査会で述べられたことがわかったという記事。https://t.co/eJb4sFKwve
— Angama (@Angama_Market) October 5, 2023
みなさん…残念なお知らせです…。4月末にコロナかかって、未だ #コロナ後遺症 抜け切らぬあかた、それなのに、もう既に抗体はないそうです…。「みんなでかかってしまえば大丈夫」言うてた人…「大丈夫」期間、5ヶ月以下やんか…(下のはワクチンの抗体。そっちはまだあるけど、感染はするからな) pic.twitter.com/zvG3B1qvBF
— あかたちかこ (@akatachikako) October 5, 2023
抗N抗体は感染するとできる抗体だが、半年でもうほぼ消失。半年前に感染した方でも、こんな事例があり、抗体保有率以上に感染歴がある人は多いと言うこと。最近、日本も抗体保有率が上がり、5〜29歳は7割前後だが、実際にはより100%に近いだろう。でも第9波は起こった。再感染もするし、集団免疫は幻想 https://t.co/ReTAjw8wHq
— Takuro⚓️コロナ情報in全国/神奈川/横浜/川崎/東京/大阪/岐阜/広島/宮崎/愛知/静岡 (@triangle24) October 5, 2023
やはり罹らないのが一番 https://t.co/85Rrme2onw
— 伊賀 治 (@osamu_iga) October 5, 2023
(そもそもWHOがオミクロン出てきたばかりの頃、2年前の冬か、再感染率上がってるって言ってたでしょ。https://t.co/wfQj7mRJB8
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 5, 2023
ハイブリッド免疫が去年秋流行ってた時も(僕含め)一部の科学者は「Hopium(笑)」と笑ってたでしょ。
人の免疫の凄さは分かるけどそれを盲信し過ぎじゃないの?ここまでウイルスが広がった以上…https://t.co/xiv4QigVQl— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 5, 2023
科学者たちは何故予測できなかったのか?じゃなくて。
予測できなかったのは貴方達だけだと僕は思うよ。
免疫研究者は免疫の凄さを信用し過ぎで楽観論を言いがちだけど、解像度低いざっくりしたこと言うと、そこまでの凄い機構が生物に必要だったのは世界が過酷だからで。
世界の過酷さを— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 5, 2023
パンデミックが広がった時には、思い出すべきだと思う。ワクチン格差、慢性感染例からの免疫回避株発生など、色々な意味で。)
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 5, 2023
◆Effect of hybrid immunity and bivalent booster vaccination on omicron sublineage neutralisation【LANCET 2022年12月5日】
Vaccination is the central strategy to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccination-induced antibodies that target the viral spike (S) protein and neutralise SARS-CoV-2 are crucial for protection against infection and disease. However, most vaccines encode for the S protein of the virus that circulated early in the pandemic (eg, the B.1 lineage), and emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants have mutations in the S protein that reduce neutralisation sensitivity. In particular, the omicron variant (B.1.1.529 lineage and sublineages) is highly mutated and efficiently evades antibodies. Therefore, bivalent mRNA vaccines have been developed that include the genetic information for S proteins of the B.1 lineage and the currently dominating omicron BA.5 lineage. These vaccines have shown increased immunogenicity and protection in mice, but information on potential differences in the effectiveness of monovalent and bivalent vaccine boosters in humans is scarce.
We compared neutralisation of BA.1, BA.4 and BA.5 (identical S proteins, BA.4-5), BA.4.6, and the emerging omicron sublineages BA.2.75.2 (circulating mainly in India), BJ.1 (parental lineage of the currently expanding XBB recombinant), and BQ.1.1 (the incidence of which is increasing in the USA and Europe). We tested neutralisation by antibodies that were induced upon triple vaccination, vaccination and breakthrough infection during the BA.1 and BA.2 wave or BA.5 wave in Germany, triple vaccination plus monovalent or bivalent mRNA booster vaccination, or triple vaccination plus breakthrough infection (BA.1 and BA.2 wave) and a bivalent mRNA booster vaccination. For this, we used S protein bearing pseudotypes, which adequately model antibody-mediated neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2. We found that neutralisation of particles pseudotyped with the B.1 S protein (B.1pp) was highest for all cohorts, followed by neutralisation of BA.1pp and BA.4-5pp, which is in line with expectations (figure; appendix p 17).
Compared with BA.4-5pp, neutralisation of BA.4.6pp and BJ.1pp was moderately reduced (up to 2·2 times lower), whereas neutralisation of BA.2.75.2pp and BQ.1.1pp was strongly reduced (up to 15·5 times lower; figure; appendix p 8). These results suggest that omicron sublineages BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1 possess high potential to evade neutralising antibodies elicited upon diverse immunisation histories. We observed that BA.1 and BA.2 breakthrough infections and BA.5 breakthrough infections in individuals who had been triple vaccinated induced higher omicron sublineage neutralisation (on average 3·7–8·5 times higher compared with triple vaccinated individuals without breakthrough infection) than monovalent or bivalent booster vaccination (on average 1·9–2·2 times higher compared with triple vaccinated individuals without breakthrough infection; appendix p 17). Furthermore, the highest omicron sublineage neutralisation was obtained for individuals who were triple vaccinated and also had a BA.1 or BA.2 breakthrough infection plus a subsequent bivalent booster vaccination (on average 17·6 times higher compared with triple vaccinated individuals without breakthrough infection; appendix p 17). No notable differences were detected between the neutralisation activity induced upon monovalent or bivalent vaccine boosters (on average 2·0 times higher following monovalent vaccination and 2·1 times higher following bivalent vaccination compared with triple vaccinated individuals without breakthrough infection).Collectively, our results show that the emerging omicron sublineages BQ.1.1 and particularly BA.2.75.2 efficiently evade neutralisation independent of the immunisation history. Although monovalent and bivalent vaccine boosters both induce high neutralising activity and increase neutralisation breadth, BA.2.75.2-specific and BQ.1.1-specific neutralisation activity remained relatively low. This finding is in keeping with the concept of immune imprinting by initial immunisation with vaccines targeting the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 B.1 lineage. Furthermore, the observation that neutralisation of BA.2.75.2pp and BQ.1.1pp was most efficient in the cohort that had a breakthrough infection during the BA.1 and BA.2 wave and later received a bivalent booster vaccination, but was still less efficient than neutralisation of B.1pp, implies that affinity maturation of antibodies and two-time stimulation with different omicron antigens might still not be sufficient to overcome immune imprinting. As a consequence, novel vaccination strategies have to be developed to overcome immune imprinting by ancestral SARS-CoV-2 antigen.
AK, IN, SP, and MH have done contract research (testing of vaccinee sera for neutralising activity against SARS-CoV-2) for Valneva unrelated to this work. GMNB served as advisor for Moderna. SP served as advisor for BioNTech, unrelated to this work. All other authors declare no competing interests. MH and GMNB are co-first authors of this study.
武漢株の頃のデータではどの論文でも明らかに唾液検体はウイルス取れない確率が高かったのだけど、
オミクロンBA.1の頃に7種類を同時にテストして唾液検体PCRが90%、RATが30-40%って論文を見かけました。
抗原検査使えねえのは相変わらずですが、唾液が一番高いのはこれまでと真逆で大事な論文かも— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 4, 2023
しれないので、またその内紹介します。オミクロン以降肺深部ではなく上部気道側へ感染を好む部位が移ってるのと関係しそうな結果。
BA.2.86系統は、免疫回避能としては最強のXBBクラス、つまり今の流行りと同程度で、抗原性が違うor思ったほど違わないかも?みたいな感じ。
その中でACE2結合能は— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 4, 2023
上がっていそうなデータ。毒性に関わるといわれる合胞体形成能はオミクロン以降落ちたままでしょうし、ACE2結合能の増加が何を意味するかは分かりませんが(当初感染力になると言われましたがオミクロンが示した通り免疫回避能の方がよっぽどoutcomeとして感染力になる)、いい情報では無いでしょう。
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 4, 2023
これも時間ある時に論文紹介するかな。
とりあえず個人的には唾液データが一番衝撃だし大事なデータで、感度特異度を示したExcelファイルもそろそろ更新しないとなと思ってます。ずっと武漢株データから唾液辞めてって言ってきたけどひっくり返さないといけないし。
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 4, 2023
何より唾液はセルフサンプリングできるから、皆りようひんとのたかいと思うし、人類側にはラッキーです。
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 4, 2023
IGROV-1 cellhttps://t.co/NMXQWMUBUg
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
一年前にIGROV-1 cellという細胞株にもomicronは感染できるという報告を紹介しました。ACE2もTMPRSSも発現量は低いそうです。いや、僕もこのcell line触ったことないから知らんけど。
これが途端にBA.2.86で重要になるか?https://t.co/D7wFrerOn0
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
A VERY important finding explaining previously observed differences in fusogenicity.@PeacockFlu @RajlabN @LongDesertTrain @yunlong_cao @jbloom_lab @SystemsVirology @EricTopol @SolidEvidence @BarouchLab @sigallab @siamosolocani @GuptaR_lab @tylernstarr @BenjMurrell @ShanLuLiu1 https://t.co/GCnR1vHGZQ pic.twitter.com/zbj53nOV2B
— Daniele Focosi, MD PhD MSc (@dfocosi) October 6, 2023
Highly mutated SARS-CoV-2 variants, like BA.2.86, raise the concern whether current/new vaccines are still suitable. New laboratory data from SSI indicate that the updated vaccines, based on XBB.1.5, remain relevant. https://t.co/rLT3YzOFD4
— Statens Serum Inst. (@SSI_dk) October 3, 2023
マジか?と何度か目を疑ったが、文章はやはりそう言っている。
BA.2.86の細胞感染は、IGROV-1とCalu-3では成立したが、Vero6はACE2/TMPRSS過剰発現させても成立しない。
つまり細胞感染経路の必要因子について絶対に僕らがまだ見逃している何かがある。
その「感染経路X」の存在は去年IGROV-1の時に— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
示唆されていたものの。
今回の論文は、デンマーク国衛研とフランスのパスツールが著者。
つまり、大御所。聞いたことない大学の端っこから変なデータが出たわけではない。まとめ
・Omicron以降、IGROV-1cellの様に、これまでとは違う細胞感染経路を獲得したのでは?は言われていた— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
・BA.2.86の場合、どうやらまだ不明なその「感染経路X」が高効率化してるかも知れない?
・今までの新コロ研究で一般的に使われてきたVero6-ACE2/TMPRSSはBA.2.86には使えない。つまりこれまで見逃していた何かの感染必要因子をBA.2.86は欠くのだろう。
↓
感染好む位置などが変わる可能性— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
なので今まで通りの「気管支・肺炎像だけ検討しときました」は危険で、BA.2.86のリスク評価には、まぁ動物実験の解剖検査時に、普段より広く注意が必要でしょう。
色んな組織みて、やっぱり呼吸器にしか障害なければそれはそれでOK。
とりあえずVivo検討の論文数が溜まるの待ちでしょうね。— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
ん?でも、databaseで見るとIGROV-1cellもそれなりにACE2発現してるやんか。なんだ。
なので、設問としては
ACE2/TMPRSSを過剰発現させたVeroで何故成立しにくいか?
の方がよっぽど大事やな。 pic.twitter.com/EZIpZHF2mw— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
◆Resistance of Omicron subvariants BA.2.75.2, BA.4.6 and BQ.1.1 to neutralizing antibodies【bioRxiv 2022年12月5日】
Abstract
Convergent evolution of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2, BA.4 and BA.5 lineages has led to the emergence of several new subvariants, including BA.2.75.2, BA.4.6. and BQ.1.1. The subvariants BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1 are expected to become predominant in many countries in November 2022. They carry an additional and often redundant set of mutations in the spike, likely responsible for increased transmissibility and immune evasion. Here, we established a viral amplification procedure to easily isolate Omicron strains. We examined their sensitivity to 6 therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and to 72 sera from Pfizer BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals, with or without BA.1/BA.2 or BA.5 breakthrough infection. Ronapreve (Casirivimab and Imdevimab) and Evusheld (Cilgavimab and Tixagevimab) lost any antiviral efficacy against BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1, whereas Xevudy (Sotrovimab) remained weakly active. BQ.1.1 was also resistant to Bebtelovimab. Neutralizing titers in triply vaccinated individuals were low to undetectable against BQ.1.1 and BA.2.75.2, 4 months after boosting. A BA.1/BA.2 breakthrough infection increased these titers, which remained about 18-fold lower against BA.2.75.2 and BQ.1.1, than against BA.1. Reciprocally, a BA.5 breakthrough infection increased more efficiently neutralization against BA.5 and BQ.1.1 than against BA.2.75.2. Thus, the evolution trajectory of novel Omicron subvariants facilitated their spread in immunized populations and raises concerns about the efficacy of most currently available mAbs.
Introduction
Successive sub-lineages of Omicron have spread worldwide since the identification of BA.1 in November 2021. Probably more than 80% of the population were infected by one or another Omicron subvariant in less than one year, without efficient protection against infection conferred by vaccination. The incidence of breakthrough infections in vaccinated individuals has thus increased with Omicron. All Omicron lineages exbibit considerable immune evasion properties. BA.1 and BA.2 contained about 32 changes in the spike protein, promoting immune escape and high transmissibility. BA.5 was then predominant in many countries by mid-2022 and was responsible for a novel peak of contaminations. BA.4 and BA.5 bear the same spike, with 4 additional modifications when compared to BA.2. The neutralizing activity of sera from COVID-19 vaccine recipients was further reduced against BA.4/BA.5 by about 3-5 fold compared to BA.1 and BA.2. Novel sub-variants with enhanced transmissibility rates, derived from either BA.2 or BA.4/BA.5, rapidly emerged and should become prevalent in November 2022. Their geographical distribution is heterogeneous, but they carry an additional limited set of mutations in the spike. For instance, BA.2.75.2, derived from BA.2, was first noted in India and Singapore and comprises R346T, F486S and D1199N substitutions. BA.4.6 was detected in various countries, including USA and UK, and carries R346T and N658S mutations. As of November 2022, BQ.1.1 became the main circulating lineage in many countries. It also carries the R346T mutation found in BA.2.75.2, along with K444T and N460K substitutions. The R346T mutation has been associated with escape from monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and from vaccine-induced antibodies. This convergent evolution of the spike suggests that the different circulating SARS-CoV-2 sub-lineages faced a similar selective pressure, probably exerted by preexisting or imprinted immunity. A characterization of these new viruses is needed to evaluate their potential impact.
A few recent articles and preprints reported an extensive escape of these Omicron subvariants to neutralization, studying sera from individuals who received three or four vaccine doses, including a bivalent booster. Most of these studies were performed with lentiviral or VSV pseudotypes. In one preprint, recombinant SARS-CoV-2 viruses carrying spikes from Omicron sublineages in an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 backbone were generated, but they might behave somewhat differently than authentic isolates.
Here, we identified and used a highly permissive cell line to amplify BA.2.75.2, BA.4.6. and BQ.1.1 isolates. We analyzed the sensitivity of these strains to approved mAbs, to sera from Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine recipients, and to individuals with BA.1/BA.2 or BA.5 breakthrough infections.
◆Neutralisation of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants BA.2.86 and EG.5.1 by antibodies induced by earlier infection or vaccination【bioRxiv 2023年10月1日】
Abstract
Highly mutated SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariant BA.2.86 emerged in July 2023. We investigated the neutralisation of isolated virus by antibodies induced by earlier infection or vaccination. The neutralisation titres for BA.2.86 were comparable to those for XBB.1 and EG.5.1, by antibodies induced by XBB.1.5 or BA.4/5 breakthrough infection or BA.4/5 vaccination.
Introduction
In late July 2023, global SARS-CoV-2 surveillance programs identified a new, highly mutated Omicron subvariant, BA.2.86. This variant is a descendant of the Omicron BA.2 variant, with the most recent common ancestor estimated to be from between 9th April and 24th July 2023. Since the emergence of BA.2.86, multiple countries have reported its presence, primarily as sporadic BA.2.86 cases with no clear epidemiological link. From the first 12 BA.2.86 cases in Denmark, the estimated effective reproduction number (Re) of this variant was 1.29-fold greater than that of XBB.1.5 and at least comparable to that of EG.5.1, one of the most rapidly expanding XBB subvariants. This is consistent with an outbreak of BA.2.86 in a care home in the United Kingdom (UK) that experienced an attack rate above 85%, indicating high transmissibility in close contact situations.
The earliest cases of BA.2.86 in Denmark suggested a clinical presentation and disease severity no different from other SARS-CoV-2 variants circulating during July/August 2023, such as EG.5.1 and XBB.1.16. Symptoms included cough, shortness of breath, and fever; none were severely ill. Some of the early cases had an underlying disease or received immune-modulating treatment. Taken together with the care home outbreak in the UK, individuals of older age and with comorbidities appear to be more at risk of developing a symptomatic BA.2.86 infection that warrants medical attention.
The increasing numbers of BA.2.86 infections 1-2 years after 3-4 immunisations, with or without prior infection, suggests that waning immunity may contribute to the susceptibility to BA.2.86 infection. Moreover, the highly mutated spike protein of BA.2.86 is antigenically distinct from all other SARS-CoV-2 variants, including the XBB subvariants, as determined using mRNA-vaccinated mouse serum. This suggests that BA.2.86 may evade pre-existing humoral immunity, as well as the acquired immunity from the updated XBB.1.5-based vaccines. The care home outbreak data suggested limited vaccine effectiveness against infection with BA.2.86 four months after vaccination.
To estimate the cross-neutralisation of BA.2.86 by XBB.1.5-induced antibodies, we used serum or plasma samples from persons who had experienced an XBB.1.5 infection as a proxy for the humoral immune response generated by the updated XBB.1.5 vaccines. In contrast to assessing antibodies raised against single SARS-Cov-2 variants in vaccinated or infected animals, human XBB.1.5 breakthrough infections are more representative of the complex and diverse pre-existing immunity of future XBB.1.5-based vaccine recipients. As a representative of the 2022 SARS-CoV-2 variant vaccine, we assessed antibody responses in persons who had either experienced an Omicron BA.4/5 breakthrough infection or received the Comirnaty Original/Omicron BA.4-5 bivalent mRNA vaccine as a fourth vaccination.
BA.2.86 vs HV.1
coming soonhttps://t.co/Dac2BmNttJ— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
#COVID19 Updates
HV.1 alias of EG.5.1.6.1 or XBB.1.9.2.5.1.6.1 with signature mutation S:L452R (#Delta legacy mutation) will become the top circulating #SARSCoV2 lineage in the #USA soon. https://t.co/762dVlW7C0
— Raj Rajnarayanan (@RajlabN) October 6, 2023
さて、HV.1にはdeltaで有名になったL452Rがある。と言っても、それはBA.5にもあったし、L452Rはdeltaの高毒性に関わってなくて、おそらく、P681Rが原因だったしと。
それに膜融合up変異1+膜融合up変異2=最強!ではなく、結局組み合わせると下がる可能性もある。https://t.co/DD7M53nJWa pic.twitter.com/okDSQIj6eD— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
言うことで、HV.1確認すると
デルタと同じS蛋白変異は少なくてまぁ別物よねというのは当たり前として。
相変わらずP681Hで、P681Rではない。組み合わせ無限過ぎるからvitroかvivo結果出ないと結論できんけど、膜融合up強毒化は個人的には心配してない。
日本タイミング的にBA.2.86→HV.1の2波に pic.twitter.com/UAOCBRCHI5— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
なったら嫌だなと思いつつ、現実化するかも知れない懸念はむしろそっちの方。
抗原性に差がなくて同時感染できるレベルだと単純に足し算波になるし。加えて、L452Rは膜融合能=毒性を下げる方向(代わりに免疫回避)だったからP681RとE484Kを持つBA.2.86の方が毒性懸念はまだ高い。
臨床データ待ち。 pic.twitter.com/2ww4p1QrGU
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 7, 2023
上のIGROV-1 cellについて、Emmanuelがまとめてくれています。
僕が言うのも変だけど、僕のスレッドよりEmmanuelのスレッドの方が分かりやすいです。IGROV-1 cellにBA.2.86のclinical sampleは感染成立しないが、一回Calu-3に感染させてからとってくれば、同じBA.2.86でもhttps://t.co/cftFzZyYfY
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 8, 2023
Vero-ACE2/TMPRSS cell感染が成立する。2 passageは成立するってこと。
EG.5.1 はclinical sampleから成立する。
ここらへん、やっぱり気になるよね。— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 8, 2023
CALU-3 cells, iGROV-1cells or Vero E6 🤔
Why is this VERY IMPORTANT ?Arigato, big thanks to @ramos262740691 who alerted me to this subject pic.twitter.com/jCFoYVRM9e
— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
2) First, at the end of 2022, there was this very interesting study from the team of Pasteur, that we posted as well as @RolandBakerIII and @outbreakupdates https://t.co/iCkpT5El46
— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
3) They explained, that to measure the transmissibility of Omicron, they had to use other cells which expressed low levels of ACE2 and TMPRSS2. pic.twitter.com/z486pcW8h1
— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
4) Fig. Improved detection of infectious Omicron BA.1 in nasopharyngeal swabs using IGROV-1 cells. pic.twitter.com/hJ5961pFFA
— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
5) The results obtained between these 2 different types of cells were quite impressive. pic.twitter.com/DHwN9Bav1w
— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
6) Then it was @StuartTurville turn to be forced to change the cells in his study as @LongDesertTrain indicatedhttps://t.co/XHdImVzdxg
— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
7) All this showed not only :
▶️ that the virus was trying different strategies to enter cells
▶️ but also entering different types of cells. pic.twitter.com/Hvy5WtqIF7— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
8) Finally there was this study reposted by @dfocosi https://t.co/gPm9KlDv9i
Strangely about BA.2.86, the differences between vero cells and Igor cells were no longer so marked. Had BA.2.86 found yet another path? pic.twitter.com/xzNFQFATag— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
9) Thank you to everyone who published these tweets, and whom I cited previously, because they encouraged me to go further and write this thread 👇https://t.co/7Y1p7iDBmU
FYI@mrmickme @DavidJoffe64 @HarrySpoelstra @UseBy2022 @0bj3ctivity @AndrewEwing11 @_ppmv @siamosolocani
— Emmanuel (@ejustin46) October 8, 2023
膜融合能(合胞体形成能)はデルタ株のP681Rから来ているという上のグラフの元論文ですが、preprint サーバー見に行ったら少し図が解像度の低い方に改訂されてました。再現性の問題かな?
なので、貼り直します。P681Rが膜融合側なのは変わらないけれど、L452Rとかが膜融合ダウン側とする2枚目の記載が pic.twitter.com/g0OERo3d3S
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 8, 2023
消えた形ですね。
そして、ついでにちょっとcell fusionについて、調べたら今年こんな論文出てたんですね。
Omicron以前にちょっと出てきて流行らなかったB.1.640さん。膜融合能は高かったようです。https://t.co/y1Am8M2ZOO— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 8, 2023
(たまに+機能が使えないのウザいな…)
2枚目にあるようにB.1.640.1の膜融合能はそのS2蛋白に依存。じゃあなに?
→T859N, D936Hと。 pic.twitter.com/BgzfL5Mhro— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 8, 2023
じゃあ何やねんというと、とりあえず毒性懸念については、681だけじゃなく859と936も注意しとくかと。それだけなんですが。
一回、ざっと調べとかないと、まだあるかも…
— ramos2 (@ramos262740691) October 8, 2023
◆High fusion and cytopathy of SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.640.1【bioRxiv 2023年9月6日】
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.
INTRODUCTION
Over the timespan of the COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 has been subjected to selection pressures, leading to emerging variants carrying their own repertoire of mutations and to temporal waves of epidemiological resurgence. The most successful variants evolved to evade the immune response displaying differing abilities to form syncytia in cell culture systems. During the period of co-circulation, the disease severity of Omicron (BA.1) was reduced in comparison to Delta. Proposed explanations for this include background immunity, different tissue tropisms – with BA.1 preferentially replicating in the upper respiratory tract – and reduced cell-cell fusogenicity of BA.1 spike. Therefore, the mechanisms surrounding SARS-CoV-2 pathogenicity and Omicron’s attenuation are still debated.
SARS-CoV-2 fuses with the cell plasma membrane to transfer its genome into the cytoplasm and instigate replication. This process is initiated through the binding of the spike to its receptor angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Spike is comprised of two subunits, S1 and S2, separated by a polybasic furin cleavage site (FCS) cleaved during viral production in the trans-Golgi network. Certain mutations in spike, such as P681H/R, allow for this process to occur more readily, subsequently improving viral fusion. During entry, spike is cleaved at the S2’ site by host proteases, mainly TMPRSS2 at the cell surface or cathepsins in endosomes, to allow the conformational changes necessary to project the fusion peptide into the host membrane, leading to membrane fusion. Thus, a series of proteolytic events regulate SARS-CoV-2 entry and tropism prior to replication of the viral RNA.
The later stages of the SARS-CoV-2 replication cycle occur in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and Golgi network. Here, the host protein COPI binds to the spike cytoplasmic tail and traffics it to the packaging site of SARS-CoV-2 virions. However, sub-optimal spike binding to COPI results in leakage to the plasma membrane. Consequently, spike at the cell surface may interact with ACE2 on neighbouring cells leading to cell-cell fusion and syncytia formation.
Histological studies of lung tissue from severe COVID-19 patients describe the presence of abnormal pneumocytes and large, multinucleated syncytia. Syncytia are also observed in the lungs of long-COVID patients who eventually succumb to the disease up to 300 days after their last negative PCR test. Syncytia could thus facilitate persistent infection, as seen in RSV infection, or contribute to pathogenesis. Syncytia formation by SARS-CoV-2 has also been demonstrated in various cell lines and in human iPSC derived cardiomyocytes. Spike mutations can impact fusogenicity. Notably, D215G and P681R/H increase fusion, with the latter promoting furin S1/S2 cleavage. Conversely, N856K and N969K in Omicron decrease fusogenicity. Nevertheless, the role of syncytia in SARS-CoV-2 replication and the impact on disease severity has yet to be fully explored.
Minor SARS-CoV-2 variants harbouring uncharacterized mutations represent opportunities in understanding certain viral processes. Variant B.1.640.1 was first identified in Republic of the Congo in April 2021 and found circulating in France in October 2021. As of May 2023, 1107 genome sequences of B.1.640.1 are available on the GISAID database, 895 from France, with the most recent dating to January 2022. Here, we isolated a B.1.640.1 strain and investigated the humoral immune response, replication, fusogenicity and cytopathy of this variant.
東京都 60歳以上の定点あたり患者報告数
→https://t.co/JNykhmq92F
第9波は減衰しつつあるようですが、患者報告数はまだまだ多く、第8波のピーク時くらいの人たちが日々感染しているようです。安心できる状況ではありません。#PCR検査と治療薬の公的負担を求めます #第9波ですマスクしましょう https://t.co/qhWGPyM8BW pic.twitter.com/AE2wWwETX1— Koichi Kawakami, 川上浩一 (@koichi_kawakami) October 5, 2023
官邸主導のノーマスク運動の結果、ワクチン無力化もあって日本は現在、2020年の合衆国に酷似した状況にあります。
対数で高止まりすることが見えてきています。
観測者としては、この冬が楽しみでワクワクしています。すでに僕の予測通りになる兆候が出てきています。https://t.co/7tUkZ2LhOc pic.twitter.com/1gxd92FRtP
— Hiroshi Makita Ph.D. 誰が日本のコロナ禍を悪化させたのか?扶桑社8/18発売中 (@BB45_Colorado) October 5, 2023
XBBワクチンはEG.5.1には有効ですが、そもそも2500万ショットしか確保していませんので医療・介護従事者、高齢者にも足りません。
年始にはこのワクチンも無効化しますし、濫用の結果、抗体生産効率が桁で下がっているので来年は抗体価だけでも有効なワクチンができないかもしれません。
— Hiroshi Makita Ph.D. 誰が日本のコロナ禍を悪化させたのか?扶桑社8/18発売中 (@BB45_Colorado) October 5, 2023