Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35871089›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

In vitro activity of therapeutic antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5.

Franck Touret, Cécile Baronti, Boris Pastorino, Paola Mariela Saba Villarroel, Laetitia Ninove, Antoine Nougairède, Xavier de Lamballerie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Vectored immunoprophylaxis and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a preclinical model.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Franck TouretUnité Des Virus Émergents (UVE: Aix-Marseille University - IRD 190 - Inserm 1207), Marseille, France. franck.touret@univ-amu.fr.
Cécile BarontiUnité Des Virus Émergents (UVE: Aix-Marseille University - IRD 190 - Inserm 1207), Marseille, France.
Boris PastorinoUnité Des Virus Émergents (UVE: Aix-Marseille University - IRD 190 - Inserm 1207), Marseille, France.
Paola Mariela Saba VillarroelUnité Des Virus Émergents (UVE: Aix-Marseille University - IRD 190 - Inserm 1207), Marseille, France.
Laetitia NinoveUnité Des Virus Émergents (UVE: Aix-Marseille University - IRD 190 - Inserm 1207), Marseille, France.
Antoine NougairèdeUnité Des Virus Émergents (UVE: Aix-Marseille University - IRD 190 - Inserm 1207), Marseille, France.
Xavier de LamballerieUnité Des Virus Émergents (UVE: Aix-Marseille University - IRD 190 - Inserm 1207), Marseille, France.
Institut de Recherche pour le Développement · FRAix-Marseille Université · FRInserm · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The replacement of the Omicron BA.1 variant of SARS-CoV-2 by the BA.2 and the rapid growth of the BA.5 sub lineage, which have both different sets of mutations in the spike glycoprotein, alters the spectrum of activity of therapeutic antibodies currently licensed in the European Union. Using clinical strains of the Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 variants, we compared the neutralising power of monoclonal antibodies against the Omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5 variants, using an ancestral strain (lineage B.1, D614G) and a Delta variant strain as reference. Sotrovimab/Vir-7831 is less active against BA.2 than against BA.1 (fold change reduction ~ 1,4) and even less active against BA.5 (fold change reduction ~ 2.7). Within the Evusheld /AZD7442 cocktail, Cilgavimab/AZD1061 is more active against BA.2 and BA.5 than against BA.1 (fold change increase ~ 32), whilst the very low activity of Tixagevimab/AZD8895 against BA.1 is not enhanced against BA.2 nor BA.5. In total, compared to BA.1, the activity of the Evusheld/AZD7442 is significantly improved against BA.2 while BA.5 is intermediate but closer to BA.2.

Indexed as

COVID-19 Drug TreatmentSpike Glycoprotein, CoronavirusAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, ViralDrug CombinationsHumansSARS-CoV-2Antibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntibodies, NeutralizingAntibodies, Viralcilgavimabcilgavimab and tixagevimab drug combinationDrug CombinationssotrovimabSpike Glycoprotein, Coronavirusspike protein, SARS-CoV-2tixagevimab

Identifiers

PMID35871089
PMCPMC9308029
OpenAlexW4286696962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.