ArticleResearch square2021
In vivo monoclonal antibody efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 variant strains.
Article in Research square, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
32 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Rapidly-emerging variants jeopardize antibody-based countermeasures against SARS-CoV-2. While recent cell culture experiments have demonstrated loss of potency of several anti-spike neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 variant strains1-3, the in vivo significance of these results remains uncertain. Here, using a panel of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) corresponding to many in advanced clinical development by Vir Biotechnology, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Regeneron, and Lilly we report the impact on protection in animals against authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants including WA1/2020 strains, a B.1.1.7 isolate, and chimeric strains with South African (B.1.351) or Brazilian (B.1.1.28) spike genes. Although some individual mAbs showed reduced or abrogated neutralizing activity against B.1.351 and B.1.1.28 viruses with E484K spike protein mutations in cell culture, low prophylactic doses of mAb combinations protected against infection in K18-hACE2 transgenic mice, 129S2 immunocompetent mice, and hamsters without emergence of resistance. Two exceptions were mAb LY-CoV555 monotherapy which lost all protective activity in vivo, and AbbVie 2B04/47D11, which showed partial loss of activity. When administered after infection as therapy, higher doses of mAb cocktails protected in vivo against viruses displaying a B.1.351 spike gene. Thus, many, but not all, of the antibody products with Emergency Use Authorization should retain substantial efficacy against the prevailing SARS-CoV-2 variant strains.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.