Ryan Hisner Profile picture
Jul 17, 2024 25 tweets 9 min read Read on X
KP.3, w/the unusual Q493E mutation, now dominant globally. To me, it's the first major spike change—involving real structural/epistatic change as opposed to treadmilling, stepwise antibody-evasion mutations merely keeping pace w/population immunity—since JN.1 emerged. 1/23
Most spike mutations affect ACE2 binding similarly in BA.2, XBB.1.5, & JN.1—e.g., Y453F confers a large incr in ACE2 affinity in all—so the XBB.1.5 deep mutational scanning info from @bdadonaite & @jbloom_lab is still invaluable. But Q493E is different. 2/
In both XBB.1.5 and BA.2 spike backgrounds, Q493E imposes a devastating hit to ACE2 affinity—so large that no variant with it could survive & circulate.
Data below from:
Bloom Lab XBB.1.5 DMS -
BA.2 RBD heat map - 3/ dms-vep.org/SARS-CoV-2_XBB…
jbloomlab.github.io/SARS-CoV-2-RBD…
Image
Initially, the bare fact that Q493E existed in JN.1* indicated something more was happening.
Later, @yunlong_cao showed that on a JN.1+F456L background Q493E actually *increases* ACE2 binding & efficiently evades Class 1 Abs—the rare win-win mutation. 4/
I don't think it's known for certain why Q493E has such dramatically different effects on ACE2 affinity and antibody evasion in JN.1 + F456L compared to BA.2 and XBB.1.5, but it's clear some sort of epistasis with JN.1-specific mutations is at work. 5/
So far the only major advance on baseline KP.3 is S:∆S31, a deletion found in KP.3.1.1 (& ~all other growing JN.1* lineages) that adds a glycan (sugar) to N29, increasing Ab evasion.
∆S31 provides a surprisingly potent advantage, as @BenjMurrell's growth chart illustrates. 6/ Image
KP.3's higher ACE2 affinity means it has more "space" to maneuver, i.e. a greater variety of stepwise, Ab-evading spike RBD mutations available. None have yet appeared, but you can be sure they will in the coming months—F456L, now universal, took time to emerge & grow. 7/
There is other evidence Q493E marks a significant departure from all previous JN.1 lineages.

R346T & F456L together give "FLiRT" variants their name. KP.3 is often called a "FLiRT" variant, but it is NOT: it lacks R346T, which is in >90% of non-KP.3 sequences. 8/ Image
With the exception of a few scattered singlets & one 8-seq branch (which also has S:H445R), R346T is entirely absent from KP.3.

Though not absolutely incompatible, it's clear R346T does not work in KP.3, in stark contrast to all other JN.1 lineages. 9/
In some ways, this is a return to normal: JN.1 has N450D, & R346T has always been incompatible with N450D, the only exceptions being small lineages of dying variants—mainly FV.1 (a BA.2.3.20 descendant) and JG.3.2.1 (an EG.5.1 descendant). 10/ Image
It's unclear why R346T & N450D don't mix well, but could Q493E's incompatibility w/R346T provide a clue?
346, 450, & 493 are very near each other.
R346T, N450D, & Q493E all involve increased negative electric charge.
(see up + down RBD in BA.2.86 spike below, PBD 8XLV)
11/
Image
Image
But just as R346T is incompatible with KP.3, I expect some mutations incompatible with FLiRT lineages may be compatible with KP.3, though no major ones have emerged yet.
12/
Clearly Q493E is hugely beneficial for the virus. Why, then, has it not emerged in other JN.1* variants?

Incompatibility with R346T is only a partial explanation; until very recently, a huge number of non-R346T lineages existed. None acquired Q493E.

Why not? 13/
Some highly advantageous mutations never appear simply because they're extremely hard to acquire—esp those requiring 2 or 3 nuc mutations. 2-nuc mutations are extraordinarily rare & usually only emerge amid intense selection pressure. E.g. F486P 14/
Q493E only requires 1 nuc mutation. But some nuc muts are far more common than others.

@richardneher & @jbloom_lab showed this in contexts where AA selection does not operate (b/c no mutation can cause an AA change—i.e. all mutations are synonymous). /15
jbloomlab.github.io/SARS2-mut-spec…
Image
Q493E requires a C->G nucleotide mutation, which is the rarest of all—about 40x less common than C->T mutations in the contexts Neher & Bloom analyzed. /16 Image
In >3400 highly mutated, chronic-infection seqs, I found similar results: compared to C->T, overall C->G mutation rate was 40.2-fold lower.
• Synonymous C->G rate 374-fold lower (unadjusted for contexts)
• Non-synonymous C->G rate 26.4-fold lower (unadjusted)
/17 Image
(Aside: I'm running something to calculate the rates of each nuc mutation in all 16 nuc contexts for each specific sequence, but it might take 2 weeks to complete. Been running 40 hours so far. Some vestige of its beginning remains, but no prospect of an end in sight.) Image
There's been much discussion of the convergent mutations we often see, i.e. the same mutations occurring independently in numerous lineages—R346T and F456L among the most notable.

@dfocosi regularly updates a diagram illustrating this convergence. /18
.@siamosolocani & I recently tried to list convergent C->G mutations. We couldn't think of any. I don't think any exist. So it's not surprising no other JN.1 lineage has gotten Q493E.
(The few non-KP.3 Q493E seqs are IMO all isolated singlets or contamination/recombination) /19
(There is 1 fascinating, maddening, enigmatic C->G mutation that's convergent in the longest, most extreme chronic-infection seqs & @solidevidence's Cryptics. The total lack of other convergent C->G mutations only magnifies its inscrutable allure. Another day, another 🧵) /20
Finally, Q493E may open one other door that's been closed until now. The BA.2 Bloom Lab RBD heat map showed two viable Q493 mutations towered above the rest in ACE2 affinity: Q493A & Q493V.

These have been off-limits (except in a few chronic-infection sequences)... /21 Image
...because each required two rare nuc mutations: the ultra-rare C->G together with an A->C or A->T mutation, both of which are also uncommon. In the case of Q493A, the mutations must occur in the correct order as well since Q493P is not viable. /22
Image
Image
493A & 493V may not confer the same huge increase in ACE2 affinity on a KP.3 background as on a BA.2 background, & they could ruin KP.3 stability or antibody evasion.
But the 2nd Q493A seq ever just appeared—the other was in Oct 2022—so this may be one to watch for. 23/end Image
Screwed up this picture. The bottom caption should NOT have R346T.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ryan Hisner

Ryan Hisner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @LongDesertTrain

Mar 26
So it's clear that BA.3.2 preferentially infects children, something we have never seen before in a SARS-CoV-2 variant.

Why?

The question's baffled me, but after a suggestion from Darren Martin, I think I have an explanation that makes sense.
1/16
I've tried to make sense of BA.3.2's penchant for kids by considering its unique spike: more compact, more closed, & more antibody-evasive than any other variant.

But I think another feature of BA.3.2 is responsible: its wholesale deletion of ORF7a, ORF7b, & ORF8 (∆ORF78).
2/
∆ORF78 is rare but not unheard of; it was in several late XBB variants (GW.5.1.1, FW.1.1, GE.1.2, etc) & a few branches of other variants. I've long thought these late XBB had an advantage in some population subsector, but I didn't suspect kids.
3/
Read 18 tweets
Mar 24
You have to wonder for how long we will continue seeing infections from 2020 continue to show up (in absurdly high quantities) in wastewater.
1/16
I suspect that the number of people continuously infected since 2020 or 2021 is much larger than we realize. It's impossible to prove, but there are case studies where a chronically infected person gets infected by a new variant, which drives out the original virus...
2/16
...which consequently leaves no trace that the person was chronically infected before the super-infecting variant—took over.

Why then are some Cryptic WW variants resistant to being outcompeted by newer variants?
3/16
Read 16 tweets
Mar 22
While the final outcome for BA.3.2 is uncertain, its unique characteristics—extensively remodeled spike NTD & SD1/SD2, novel S2 muts, & total deletion of ORF7a/7b/8—make it the best candidate for co-dominance we've seen, which could mark a new era in SARS-2 evolution. 1/
Until now, the broad pattern of SARS-2 evolution has been:

1) Emergence of a saltation variant originating in a chronic infection

2) Rapid growth/global dominance & a variant-driven wave of infection—especially if it emerges in late fall/winter (BA.1, XBB.1.5, JN.1). 2/
3) Stepwise evolution over the next few months/years, usually without driving major waves (the JN.1-descended KP.3.1.1 being a notable exception).

4) Repeat

3/
Read 34 tweets
Dec 29, 2025
Very proud to be a co-author on this comprehensive preprint on the novel, growing saltation lineage BA.3.2, together with @Tuliodna, Darren Martin, Dikeledi Kekana, and lead author @graemedor. 1/9
I would normally write a summary 🧵 of the BA.3.2 mutational analysis here, but as much of my contribution parallels my previous BA.3.2 threads I'll just link to those here, w/brief descriptions of each.

This is my first, big-picture BA.3.2 🧵. 2/9
Short thread from June when the first travel BA.3.2 sequences showed up. I think my prediction from back then has pretty much been borne out. 3/9
Read 9 tweets
Dec 24, 2025
BA.3.2 emerged in Nov 2024 after ~3 years of intrahost evolution with >50 new spike AA muts, but since then, it's changed very little. Could the drug molnupiravir (MOV) galvanize BA.3.2 into pursuing new evolutionary paths? A new 89-mut MOV BA.3.2 seq suggests it could. 1/11 Image
Background on MOV: It's a mutagenic drug. Its purpose is to cause so many mutations that the virus becomes unviable & is cleared. But we've long known this often does not happen. Instead, the virus persists in highly mutated form & can be transmitted. 2/
I was an author on a paper published in @Nature that conclusively showed not only that MOV has created highly mutated, persistent viruses, but that these viruses have transmitted numerous times. See 🧵 below by lead author @theosanderson. 3/
Read 11 tweets
Dec 22, 2025
The most valuable viral research tools—@nextstrain & CovSpectrum—are being destroyed, not only blocked from new data but now forbidden from even sharing info from the PAST. Why?

Because GISAID is run dictatorially by a con man, paranoid egomaniac, & liar named Peter Bogner. 1/
I use CovSpectrum & Nextstrain every day—& I'm not the only one. Every Covid thread I've ever posted here has relied partly on CovSpectrum & Nextstrain for information & visuals. These vital tools have now been stolen from us by a world-class grifter. 2/ thinkglobalhealth.org/article/to-fin…Image
For years scientists knew something was very, very wrong with GISAID, but the breakout story (from which much of this 🧵is based) came 2 years ago in @ScienceMagazine from @sciencecohen & Martin Enserik. 3/
science.org/content/articl…
Read 22 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(