This new #SARSCoV2 Omicron subvariant (BA.2.75) flagged here by @PeacockFlu is worth tracking, as it has appreciable antigenic change relative to its parent BA.2. Key mutations: G446S & R493Q
Here is summary of what those mutations imply for antibody escape & ACE2 affinity (1/n)
. Therefore, BA.2.75's antigenic advantage relative to BA.2 will be most pronounced in people who have NOT had BA.1 exposure. (3/n)
For comparison, BA.4/5 has ~3-fold drop in neutralization relative to BA.2. Our antibody-escape calculator (academic.oup.com/ve/article/8/1…), suggests BA.2.75 will have similar drop in people w/o BA.1 breakthrough infection, but less of a drop in people w prior BA.1 infection (4/n)
The difference is because BA.4/5 have F486V mutation (which escapes antibodies from both current vaccine & BA.1 breakthrough), whereas BA.2.75 lacks F486V but has G446S (which escapes antibodies from current vaccine but less so from BA.1 breakthrough). (5/n)
There is also an evolutionary role for R493Q, which is in both BA.2.75 & BA.4/5. This mutation is reversion of Q493R that occurred earlier in BA.2's evolution. R493Q is NOT a major antigenic mutation, but enables both F486V (in BA.4/5) and G446S (in BA.2.75). (6/n)
) shows both G446S & F486V decrease ACE2 affinity of BA.2 (by -0.1 & -0.5 log10 Kd, respectively). But R493Q buffers these mutations by increasing ACE2 affinity by 1.1 log10 Kd. (7/n)
In general, ACE2-affinity enhancing mutations like R493Q (and previously N501Y) are often found with antibody-escape mutations because they buffer the cost of affinity-decreasing escape mutations:
Note my above analysis only relates to antibody escape. Success of any variant also depends on inherent transmissibility, which is hard to measure experimentally & can only be estimated once there is sufficient epidemiological data to see how it fares in human population (9/n)
But based on limited info so far, I agree with @PeacockFlu that BA.2.75 is worth monitoring. It will have antibody escape that is similar to that for BA.4/5 with respect to current vaccine (hopefully those Omicron vaccine updates are coming soon...) (10/n)
Also, see this thread (& associated paper) by @jianfcpku describing work w @yunlong_cao, Sunney Xie, et al that provides most of deep mutational scanning data on which my above analysis is based, and also highlights importance of site 446:
Finally we should be glad that G446S in BA.2.75 is not on BA.4/5 background w F486V. Most concerning antigenic variant would have mutation at site 486 plus one at site like 346, 444, or 446 (
In our deep mutational scanning of BA.2 RBD, N460K increases both ACE2 affinity (+0.2 log10 Kd) & RBD expression (a proxy for stability). See jbloomlab.github.io/SARS-CoV-2-RBD…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We examined spike of KP.3.1.1, a strain from late 2024 / early 2025 similar to current variants
KP.3.1.1 & other recent variants have >60 spike amino-acid mutations relative to early pandemic strains, as spike has evolved at extraordinary rate of >10 mutations/year on avg
We previously developed pseudovirus deep mutational scanning (), which uses non-replicative viral particles to safely study spike mutations.
Here we used approach to measure how mutations to KP.3.1.1 spike affect five phenotypes, as shown below. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36868218/
We used pseudovirus deep mutational scanning to characterize all mutations to a recent H3N2 HA. This approach uses virions that can only undergo one round of cell entry & so are not pathogens capable of causing disease.
As can be seen below, constraint due to mutational impacts on cell entry are widely distributed across HA including receptor-binding pocket and fusion peptide. But mutational constraint due to HA stability is concentrated at trimer and HA1-HA2 interface.
In new study, we find dramatic differences in specificities of serum neutralizing antibodies in infants w single infection by a recent SARS-CoV-2 strain versus adults/children imprinted by an early viral strain.
As background, immune response to a virus is “imprinted” by first exposure, since later exposures to new viral strains often activate pre-existing B-cells.
For SARS-CoV-2, most people globally imprinted by an early viral strain from either vaccination or infection in 2020-2021.
However, small but growing fraction of population has instead been imprinted by more recent viral strain.
Specifically, we compared adults/children imprinted by original vaccine then infected w XBB* strain in 2023 vs infants only infected w XBB* in 2023.
I’ve updated SARSCoV2 antibody-escape calculator w new deep mutational scanning data of @yunlong_cao @jianfcpku
My interpretation: antigenic evolution currently constrained by pleiotropic effects of mutations on RBD-ACE2 affinity, RBD up-down position & antibody neutralization
@Nucleocapsoid @HNimanFC @mrmickme2 @0bFuSc8 @PeacockFlu @CVRHutchinson @SCOTTeHENSLEY To add to thread linked above, human British Columbia H5 case has a HA sequence (GISAID EPI_ISL_19548836) that is ambiguous at *both* site Q226 and site E190 (H3 numbering)
Both these sites play an important role in sialic acid binding specificity
@Nucleocapsoid @HNimanFC @mrmickme2 @0bFuSc8 @PeacockFlu @CVRHutchinson @SCOTTeHENSLEY If you are searching literature, these sites are E190 and Q226 in H3 numbering, E186 and Q222 in mature H5 numbering, and E202 and Q238 in sequential H5 numbering (see: )dms-vep.org/Flu_H5_America…