ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2021
Macaque-human differences in SARS-CoV-2 Spike antibody response elicited by vaccination or infection.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Macaques are a commonly used model for studying immunity to human viruses, including for studies of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. However, it is unknown whether macaque antibody responses recapitulate, and thus appropriately model, the response in humans. To answer this question, we employed a phage-based deep mutational scanning approach (Phage-DMS) to compare which linear epitopes are targeted on the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein in humans and macaques following either vaccination or infection. We also used Phage-DMS to determine antibody escape pathways within each epitope, enabling a granular comparison of antibody binding specificities at the locus level. Overall, we identified some common epitope targets in both macaques and humans, including in the fusion peptide (FP) and stem helix-heptad repeat 2 (SH-H) regions. Differences between groups included a response to epitopes in the N-terminal domain (NTD) and C-terminal domain (CTD) in vaccinated humans but not vaccinated macaques, as well as recognition of a CTD epitope and epitopes flanking the FP in convalescent macaques but not convalescent humans. There was also considerable variability in the escape pathways among individuals within each group. Sera from convalescent macaques showed the least variability in escape overall and converged on a common response with vaccinated humans in the SH-H epitope region, suggesting highly similar antibodies were elicited. Collectively, these findings suggest that the antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in macaques shares many features with humans, but with substantial differences in the recognition of certain epitopes and considerable individual variability in antibody escape profiles, suggesting a diverse repertoire of antibodies that can respond to major epitopes in both humans and macaques.
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.